Daniel Ray Garcia v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Order filed September 15, 2022

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11-21-00145-CR

__________

DANIEL RAY GARCIA, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 106th District Court Gaines County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 19-5086

ORDER

We have reviewed the “Motion to Disqualification or Recusal Justices J.M.

Bailey, W.S. Trotter, W.B. Williams under Rule 16 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rule 18 of Texas Rules of Civil Procedure” filed in this cause on September 12, 2022, as it pertains to seeking the disqualification or recusal of Chief Justice John M. Bailey. Pursuant to Rule 16.3(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Chief Justice Bailey has considered the motion in chambers. Chief Justice Bailey has found no reason to disqualify or recuse himself and, pursuant to Rule 16.3(b), has certified the issue to the entire court for a determination by the

2

other justices of this court.1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 16.3(b). Justice W. Stacy Trotter and Justice W. Bruce Williams have decided the matter without Chief Justice Bailey’s participation.

The disqualification and recusal of appellate court justices is controlled by Rule 16 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The grounds for disqualification are set out in the Texas Constitution:

No judge shall sit in any case wherein the judge may be interested, or where either of the parties may be connected with the judge, either by affinity or consanguinity, within such a degree as may be prescribed by law, or when the judge shall have been counsel in the case.

TEX. CONST. art. V, § 11; see Tesco Am., Inc. v. Strong Indus., Inc., 221 S.W.3d 550, 551–52 (Tex. 2006). The grounds for recusal of an appellate court justice are provided in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 16.2; see TEX. R. CIV. P. 18b. We find no reason for Chief Justice Bailey to be disqualified or to recuse himself and hold that none of the grounds set out in the Texas Constitution or Rule 18b are applicable to Chief Justice Bailey in this case. See TEX. CONST. art. V, § 11; TEX. R. CIV. P. 18b; see also Manges v. Guerra, 673 S.W.2d 180, 185 (Tex. 1984); McCullough v. Kitzman, 50 S.W.3d 87, 88 (Tex. App.—Waco 2001, pet. denied).

The request for the disqualification or recusal of Chief Justice John M. Bailey is denied.

September 15, 2022 PER CURIAM Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Trotter, J., and Williams, J. Bailey, C.J., not participating.

1 A copy of Chief Justice Bailey’s written certification is attached to this order.