Ex Parte: Damon Good v. the State of Texas
This text of Ex Parte: Damon Good v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte: Damon Good v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order entered January 19, 2023
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-22-01229-CR
EX PARTE DAMON GOOD
On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 380-05643-2022
ORDER
Before the Court is appellant’s January 4, 2023 motion to supplement the
record and the State’s January 6, 2023 response and motion for leave to file an
amended brief. The current motions arise from the State’s assertion in its brief that
appellant did not request an evidentiary hearing on his habeas application.
Appellant seeks to supplement the record with printouts of an email
exchange between his counsel and the bailiff in which counsel inquired how to set
the case for a hearing and the bailiff informed counsel that the trial court would
hear the case by written submission. The State does not oppose supplementing the
record with the emails, but whether supplementation is granted or not, moves to amend its brief to clarify that appellant only informally requested a hearing and
never objected to the trial court hearing the matter by written submission.
In reviewing the trial court’s habeas ruling, we consider evidence admitted
in any hearing and in the record as it existed before the trial court at the time the
matter was heard. See Ex parte Martinez, 560 S.W.3d 681, 695 (Tex. App.—San
Antonio 2018, pet. ref’d); Ex parte Storm, 49 S.W.3d 401, 402 (Tex. App.—Fort
Worth 2000, no pet.). Because there is no showing that the email exchange
between counsel and the bailiff was before the trial court and part of the record
when the trial court ruled on appellant’s habeas application, it is not part of the
record on appeal. See Martinez, 560 S.W.3d at 695; Storm, 49 S.W.3d at 402.
Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion.
We GRANT the State’ s motion to amend its brief for the limited purpose of
clarifying that appellant never filed a formal request or motion for a hearing and
did not object to the trial court hearing the matter by submission. We ORDER the
State’s amended brief due within FOURTEEN DAYS of the date of this order.
After the State files its amended brief, the Court will notify the parties by
letter of the submission date and panel that will consider the appeal.
/s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
–2–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte: Damon Good v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-damon-good-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.