Ex Parte Carey

704 S.W.2d 13, 29 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 180, 1986 Tex. LEXIS 928
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 29, 1986
DocketC-4005, C-4676
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 704 S.W.2d 13 (Ex Parte Carey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Carey, 704 S.W.2d 13, 29 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 180, 1986 Tex. LEXIS 928 (Tex. 1986).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an original habeas corpus proceeding. 1 The trial court held Richard L. Carey, the defendant in a paternity suit, in contempt of court for violating two separate orders to appear for a blood test. The fines imposed by the two judgments exceed the contempt powers set out in TEX. GOV’T. CODE ANN. Sec. 21.001(b). Carey is remanded to the sheriff’s custody for *14 discharge on payment of two $500 fines and costs.

An order signed August 17, 1984 required Carey to appear for a blood test on August 28. On March 27, 1985 the trial court held him in contempt for failure to appear for the blood test and ordered him incarcerated for 72 hours and until he paid a $5,000 fine and submitted to a blood test. We granted Carey’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and released him from jail on the posting of a $1,000 bond. 2

Thereafter, the trial court signed an order dated June 28, 1985 requiring Carey to submit to a blood test on July 2. On October 21 the trial court rendered a second contempt judgment based on Carey’s failure to appear for the test, ordering him to jail for 72 hours and until he paid a fine of $25,000 and submitted to a blood test. We granted Carey’s second petition for writ of habeas corpus and released him from jail on the posting of another $1,000 bond. 3

On October 22 the trial court issued an order designating Carey the father of the child based on a jury verdict. This renders the requirement in the contempt judgments that Carey submit to a blood test moot. Since Carey remained in jail for at least 72 hours under each contempt order before we released him on bond, the only remaining issue for consideration is the amount of the fines imposed by the trial court.

Under TEX. GOV’T. CODE ANN. Sec. 21.001(b) the district court could not assess a fine of more than $500 for contempt. In Ex parte Campbell, 417 S.W.2d 585 (Tex.1967), we held that a judgment of contempt assessing a fine of more than the statutory maximum was void insofar as it exceeded the court’s contempt power. Therefore, the relator was remanded to the sheriff with orders that he be discharged upon the payment of the statutory fine and costs.

The contempt judgments in this case exceed the statutory limits under Sec. 21.-001(b) by $4,500 and $24,500. Since the judgments conflict with the statute and our holding in Ex parte Campbell, supra, we have reviewed Carey’s petitions without hearing oral argument.

A majority of the court holds Richard L. Carey is remanded to the Sheriff of Dallas County, but he is entitled to be discharged upon payment of two $500 fines and costs. If he is not released when the fines and costs have been paid, we will entertain another petition for writ of habeas corpus.

1

. Since Carey was held in contempt twice for the same reason, and his two petitions for writ of habeas corpus raise identical legal issues, we will consider both petitions in this opinion.

2

. Cause No. C-4005.

3

. Cause No. C-4676.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Henry
154 S.W.3d 594 (Texas Supreme Court, 2005)
In Re Houston
92 S.W.3d 870 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)
in Re: Sam Houston
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002
In Re Villanueva
56 S.W.3d 905 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
Cadle Co. v. Lobingier
50 S.W.3d 662 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
In Re Patillo
32 S.W.3d 907 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
in Re: Charles T. Patillo
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000
Ex Parte Kimsey
915 S.W.2d 523 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Rosser v. Squier
902 S.W.2d 962 (Texas Supreme Court, 1995)
Ex Parte Hall
854 S.W.2d 656 (Texas Supreme Court, 1993)
Ex Parte Davila
718 S.W.2d 281 (Texas Supreme Court, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
704 S.W.2d 13, 29 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 180, 1986 Tex. LEXIS 928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-carey-tex-1986.