In Re Gary Wayne Inmon v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-24-00175-CV
In re Gary Wayne Inmon
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY
OPINION
Relator Gary Wayne Inmon has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus
challenging the trial court’s February 2024 Order of Enforcement by Contempt and Suspension of
Commitment, in which the trial court found Inmon guilty of violating the trial court’s
November 2022 Order in Suit to Modify Parent-Child Relationship. See Tex. Gov’t Code
§ 22.221(d); Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. In an original proceeding, the relator bears the burden of
providing this Court with a sufficient record to establish his right to relief. Walker v. Packer,
827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); see also In re Norvell, 610 S.W.3d 598, 600
(Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (“[I]t is fundamental that
the court have a proper record before reaching the merits.”).
In this case, Inmon has failed to comply with certain procedural requirements of
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52. First, Inmon has not certified “that he or she has reviewed
the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent
evidence included in the appendix or record.” 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j). Second, Inmon has
not provided (1) “a certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document
showing the matter complained of,” id. R. 52.3(k)(1) (establishing required contents of appendix),
and (2) “a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim for
relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding,” 2 id. R. 52.7(a)(1) (establishing required
contents of record). Third, Inmon has not provided “a properly authenticated transcript of any
relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding, including any exhibits offered in evidence, or
a statement that no testimony was adduced in connection with the matter complained.” Id.R. 52.7(a)(2).
Inmon’s request for habeas relief requires this Court to analyze the proceedings
underlying both the trial court’s February 2024 Order and the November 2022 Order. Among
other documents material to his claim for relief, Inmon failed to provide the initial divorce decree,
any subsequent orders modifying the decree, the motions underlying the November 2022 Order,
and authenticated transcripts of relevant testimony from the proceedings underlying the
November 2022 Order and the February 2024 Order, including any exhibits offered in evidence.
See id. R. 52.3(k)(1)(A); id. R. 52.7(a). Having reviewed the petition and the record provided, we
1
Relator’s certification “that the factual statements contained in the attached petition are
true and correct and based on the record and proceedings in the underlying case” fails to certify
that he has “concluded that every factual statement in the petition is supported by competent
evidence included in the appendix or record,” as required by Rule 52.3(j).
2
Relator’s certification “that Appendixes 1-13 are true and correct copies of the relevant
pleadings, transcripts and materials before the trial court related to the ruling on which Relator
seeks review by writ of habeas corpus” does not suffice to meet the requirement of providing
copies supported by a sworn declaration or that are certified by the trial court’s clerk. Likewise,
it does not satisfy the criteria established by the Texas Legislature for making an unsworn
declaration that may be used in lieu of a written sworn declaration. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.
Code § 132.001.
2
deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus. See id. R. 52.8(a). We lift our stay of the trial court’s
February 2024 Order of Enforcement by Contempt and Suspension of Commitment.
__________________________________________
Gisela D. Triana, Justice
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Theofanis
Filed: July 18, 2024
3