ACCEPTED 03-14-00270-CV 5054620 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/27/2015 10:47:14 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK NO. 03-14-00270-CV
FILED IN rd 3rd COURT OF APPEALS IN RE ) IN THE 3 COURT OFAUSTIN, APPEALS TEXAS ) 4/27/2015 10:47:14 PM ) JEFFREY D. KYLE ) Clerk CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM )
MOTION TO EXTEND TIME
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, and request the Court
to grant his Motion to Extend Time pursuant to Tex. R. App. Proc. 10.5(b),
and shows the following:
I.
Tex. R. App. Proc. 10.5(b) states the requirements for motions to
extend time. Furthermore, with regards to motions to extend time to file a
brief, such motions may be filed before or after the deadline, Tex. R. App.
Proc. 38.6(d). The deadline for filing appellant’s brief was on or around
4/27/2015. Appellant has filed an Application for Habeas Corpus in the trial
court on 3/19/2015 which is still pending and which has not been decided in
this case. Movant has had phone communication with the Court requesting
that the motion be set for hearing all to no avail. On 4/22/2015, Movant sent
another request for a hearing or that decision to the made on the Application
for Habeas Corpus, a copy of the letter and application for habeas corpus are
Motion to Extend Time 1 attached to this motion. The application for habeas corpus will have a
bearing on the Court’s review of this case on appeal. Appellant requests an
extension of 30 days to file the appellant’s brief in this case or at least until
the trial court decides the motion for habeas corpus. Additionally, the
failure to file the brief before the deadline was not deliberate or intentional
but resulted from inadvertence, mistake or mischance: Christopher Graham
has been waiting for the trial court to decide the application for habeas
corpus which Movant thought would have been heard or decided before
4/27/2015 and said motion has a direct bearing on this court’s ability to hear
the present case. As a result a reasonable explanation has been provided for
this motion for extension of time, and Counsel will be able to file the
appellate brief immediately after the trial court decides Movant’s
Application for Habeas Corpus.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Movant has shown a
reasonable explanation for the extension request. Appellant requests an
extension of filing the appellant brief until the application for habeas corpus
has been determined and for such other and further relief that may be
awarded at law or in equity.
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren Graham & Associates PLLC
Motion to Extend Time 2 By: CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM Texas Bar No. 24047549 700 N. St. Mary’s Street, San Antonio, Texas Tel. and Fax: 210-787-3430
UNSWORN DECLARATION
"My name is CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM; and my address is P.O. Box 226256. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information contained in the Motion to Extend Time is true and correct. Executed in Dallas County, State of Texas, on the 27th day of April, 2015.
Declarant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a true and correct copy of Motion to Extend time was served on the Comal County District attorney via facsimile 830-608-2008 on 4/27/2015.
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
Counsel for movant attempted to contact the assistant district attorney regarding the merits of this motion to no avail. The attorney handling this appeal could not be located.
Motion to Extend Time 3 Declarant
Motion to Extend Time 4 4.22.2015
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL:7014 2870 0000 9003 4166 Comal County District Clerk 150 N. Seguin, Suite #304 New Braunfels, Texas 78130
RE: In Re Christopher Graham, Case No. CR2013-366; Application for Habeas Corpus
To Whom It May Concern:
I filed a request for habeas corpus in the above captioned case on 3/19/2015, almost a month has gone by without any hearing being set or any action taken by the court on the application. I have called several times to request a hearing date only to be rebuffed or given the run around. I am requesting a hearing date on my application for Habeas corpus or I am requesting that the court make a decision as soon as possible on the application.
You can reach me anytime via cell phone at 469-605-6846 should you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards,
Christopher L. Graham, Esq. LGI PLLC Lauren Graham & Associates PLLC State Bar Number: 24047549 NO. CR2013-366
IN RE ) IN THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM ) COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS
APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Now comes accused, CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, and makes his Application for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Seeking release from confinement and release from the contempt order entered on
4/8/2014, and for good cause shows the following:
1. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM is illegally confined and restrained of his liberty by the
Sheriff of Comal County, Texas; CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM has been released pending appeal of the
contempt order on a $5,000 cash bond.
2. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM confinement and restraint is illegal because bond is
excessive, oppressive and beyond the financial means of CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, in violation
of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, §§ 11, 13 and
19 of the Texas Constitution, and Articles 1.09 and 17.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
Furthermore the contempt order entered on 4/8/2014 is illegal
3. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM respectfully requests the Court to conduct an evidentiary
hearing and, after receiving evidence, to reduce the amount of bond to a reasonable amount or a
personal recognizance bond in order that CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM will have an opportunity to
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1
obtain release on a personal recognizance bond pending the appeal of the erroneous contempt order
and that the Court grant the habeas corpus application and vacate the 4/8/2014 contempt order
because of due process violations due to the following reasons:
1. Movant committed no acts intentionally disrespectful to the court, or that actually obstructed the
administration of justice. The cases at issue were in no way delayed except for by actions of the
Court that were independent of the actions of Movant, therefore a finding of contempt in this case
was improper.
2. The Court allowed for the admission of the court transcript of all docket activities taking place on
2/25/2014. The recording of the Court transcript from the docket call of 2/25/2014 contained matters
from other cases that was irrelevant to the contempt proceeding. Furthermore, it contained
inadmissible hearsay. The State was unable to prove any hearsay exception calling for the
admissibility of the transcript. The admission of the transcript was improper.
3. The Court did not specify that counsel would be subjected to criminal contempt for failure to
announce ready at precisely 9 am at the 2/25/2014 docket call. Additionally, the Court did not state
that Movant would be held in contempt by arriving at court shortly after 1:15 pm when it had
announced other contested matters to be heard during the afternoon session on 2/25/2014.
Furthermore, the court did not indicate in its notice of trial documentation in the State v. Cynthia
Browne case that a failure to appear by counsel on 3/27/2013 would result in criminal contempt when
Movant had spoken to the court coordinator and was told that the case was not going to trial on
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
ACCEPTED 03-14-00270-CV 5054620 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/27/2015 10:47:14 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK NO. 03-14-00270-CV
FILED IN rd 3rd COURT OF APPEALS IN RE ) IN THE 3 COURT OFAUSTIN, APPEALS TEXAS ) 4/27/2015 10:47:14 PM ) JEFFREY D. KYLE ) Clerk CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM )
MOTION TO EXTEND TIME
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, and request the Court
to grant his Motion to Extend Time pursuant to Tex. R. App. Proc. 10.5(b),
and shows the following:
I.
Tex. R. App. Proc. 10.5(b) states the requirements for motions to
extend time. Furthermore, with regards to motions to extend time to file a
brief, such motions may be filed before or after the deadline, Tex. R. App.
Proc. 38.6(d). The deadline for filing appellant’s brief was on or around
4/27/2015. Appellant has filed an Application for Habeas Corpus in the trial
court on 3/19/2015 which is still pending and which has not been decided in
this case. Movant has had phone communication with the Court requesting
that the motion be set for hearing all to no avail. On 4/22/2015, Movant sent
another request for a hearing or that decision to the made on the Application
for Habeas Corpus, a copy of the letter and application for habeas corpus are
Motion to Extend Time 1 attached to this motion. The application for habeas corpus will have a
bearing on the Court’s review of this case on appeal. Appellant requests an
extension of 30 days to file the appellant’s brief in this case or at least until
the trial court decides the motion for habeas corpus. Additionally, the
failure to file the brief before the deadline was not deliberate or intentional
but resulted from inadvertence, mistake or mischance: Christopher Graham
has been waiting for the trial court to decide the application for habeas
corpus which Movant thought would have been heard or decided before
4/27/2015 and said motion has a direct bearing on this court’s ability to hear
the present case. As a result a reasonable explanation has been provided for
this motion for extension of time, and Counsel will be able to file the
appellate brief immediately after the trial court decides Movant’s
Application for Habeas Corpus.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Movant has shown a
reasonable explanation for the extension request. Appellant requests an
extension of filing the appellant brief until the application for habeas corpus
has been determined and for such other and further relief that may be
awarded at law or in equity.
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren Graham & Associates PLLC
Motion to Extend Time 2 By: CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM Texas Bar No. 24047549 700 N. St. Mary’s Street, San Antonio, Texas Tel. and Fax: 210-787-3430
UNSWORN DECLARATION
"My name is CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM; and my address is P.O. Box 226256. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information contained in the Motion to Extend Time is true and correct. Executed in Dallas County, State of Texas, on the 27th day of April, 2015.
Declarant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a true and correct copy of Motion to Extend time was served on the Comal County District attorney via facsimile 830-608-2008 on 4/27/2015.
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
Counsel for movant attempted to contact the assistant district attorney regarding the merits of this motion to no avail. The attorney handling this appeal could not be located.
Motion to Extend Time 3 Declarant
Motion to Extend Time 4 4.22.2015
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL:7014 2870 0000 9003 4166 Comal County District Clerk 150 N. Seguin, Suite #304 New Braunfels, Texas 78130
RE: In Re Christopher Graham, Case No. CR2013-366; Application for Habeas Corpus
To Whom It May Concern:
I filed a request for habeas corpus in the above captioned case on 3/19/2015, almost a month has gone by without any hearing being set or any action taken by the court on the application. I have called several times to request a hearing date only to be rebuffed or given the run around. I am requesting a hearing date on my application for Habeas corpus or I am requesting that the court make a decision as soon as possible on the application.
You can reach me anytime via cell phone at 469-605-6846 should you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards,
Christopher L. Graham, Esq. LGI PLLC Lauren Graham & Associates PLLC State Bar Number: 24047549 NO. CR2013-366
IN RE ) IN THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM ) COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS
APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Now comes accused, CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, and makes his Application for Writ of
Habeas Corpus Seeking release from confinement and release from the contempt order entered on
4/8/2014, and for good cause shows the following:
1. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM is illegally confined and restrained of his liberty by the
Sheriff of Comal County, Texas; CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM has been released pending appeal of the
contempt order on a $5,000 cash bond.
2. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM confinement and restraint is illegal because bond is
excessive, oppressive and beyond the financial means of CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM, in violation
of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, §§ 11, 13 and
19 of the Texas Constitution, and Articles 1.09 and 17.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
Furthermore the contempt order entered on 4/8/2014 is illegal
3. CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM respectfully requests the Court to conduct an evidentiary
hearing and, after receiving evidence, to reduce the amount of bond to a reasonable amount or a
personal recognizance bond in order that CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM will have an opportunity to
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1
obtain release on a personal recognizance bond pending the appeal of the erroneous contempt order
and that the Court grant the habeas corpus application and vacate the 4/8/2014 contempt order
because of due process violations due to the following reasons:
1. Movant committed no acts intentionally disrespectful to the court, or that actually obstructed the
administration of justice. The cases at issue were in no way delayed except for by actions of the
Court that were independent of the actions of Movant, therefore a finding of contempt in this case
was improper.
2. The Court allowed for the admission of the court transcript of all docket activities taking place on
2/25/2014. The recording of the Court transcript from the docket call of 2/25/2014 contained matters
from other cases that was irrelevant to the contempt proceeding. Furthermore, it contained
inadmissible hearsay. The State was unable to prove any hearsay exception calling for the
admissibility of the transcript. The admission of the transcript was improper.
3. The Court did not specify that counsel would be subjected to criminal contempt for failure to
announce ready at precisely 9 am at the 2/25/2014 docket call. Additionally, the Court did not state
that Movant would be held in contempt by arriving at court shortly after 1:15 pm when it had
announced other contested matters to be heard during the afternoon session on 2/25/2014.
Furthermore, the court did not indicate in its notice of trial documentation in the State v. Cynthia
Browne case that a failure to appear by counsel on 3/27/2013 would result in criminal contempt when
Movant had spoken to the court coordinator and was told that the case was not going to trial on
3/31/2014. Therefore, criminal contempt was improper.
4. Movant was not afforded counsel nor informed about a right to counsel in the criminal contempt
procedure. Therefore the contempt ruling is in error.
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 2
5. Court documentation does not reflect that Movant was properly personally served with the show
cause order in either case.
6. Movant was entitled to a jury trial in this contempt action since the punishment that could have been
assessed could have been more than 6 months.
7. Punishment of 15 days assessed in this case was draconian, considering that Movant is an officer of
the court and has other obligations in other courts. The Court could have and should have considered
other alternatives to confinement, such as a fine, community service, house arrest or reporting to
confinement on weekends, or work release to name a few.
8. There was no evidence in the record to support a $5,000 cash bond that was assessed in this case.
Movant is not a flight risk, dangerous, there are no victims at risk as a result of Movant’s actions,
there was no evidence that Movant was not dutifully going to pursue appeal in this case or neglect
any court appearances. Officers of the court are typically entitled to personal recognizance bonds in
contempt matters pending the appointment of an administrative judge. It should be no different on
appeal. Movant requests that the cash bond be converted to a personal recognizance bond and that all
bond monies be refunded to Movant..
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM prays that the
Court grant this application and discharge CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM from such illegal confinement;
and/or that CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM be allowed a personal recognizance appeal bond.
Lauren Graham & Associates PLLC 700 N. St. Mary’s Street #1400 San Antonio, Texas Tel. (210) 787-3430
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 3
By:
CHRISTOPHER L. GRAHAM State Bar No. 24047549
Ther is to certify that on 3/19/2015 a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was
served on the District Attorney's Office, Comal County, Texas via facsimile 830-608-2008 .
"My name is CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information contained in the Application for Habeas Corpus is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed in County, State of Texas, on the 18th day March, 2015
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 4
NO. CR2013-366
IN RE ) IN THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT ) ) ) CHRISTOPHER GRAHAM ) COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER
On , 2015, came on to be considered the Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus in
the above styled and numbered cause, and said Application is hereby (GRANTED) (DENIED).
Accordingly, the contempt order of 4/8/2014 is vacated.
Signed on .
JUDGE PRESIDING
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus 5