In Re Jalen Barnes v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 25, 2025
• Docket: 04-25-00296-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-25-00296-CV

IN RE Jalen BARNES

Original Proceeding 1 0F

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice Velia J. Meza, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 25, 2025

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS GRANTED

Relator filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on May 8, 2025. This court issued an

order requesting a response from respondent and real party in interest by no later than May 23,

2025. Neither respondent nor real party in interest has filed a response to the petition for writ of

habeas corpus.

Respondent issued an order holding relator in contempt of court on May 8, 2023.

Respondent ordered relator to serve two (2) months in the Bexar County jail. No motion for

contempt was filed. No hearing on constructive contempt was held. Relator was not provided

notice that he faced prospective jail time, nor was relator advised of his right to an attorney.

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2023CI05954, styled James Tyler Priest v. Cartier J Transport LLC and Jalen Barnes, pending in the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Monique Diaz presiding. 04-25-00296-CV

Relator was not present for the hearing on contempt. A commitment order was subsequently

issued on March 16, 2025. Relator was not provided with an attorney despite requesting one.

Criminal contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature entitling alleged contemnors

to many of the same due process rights guaranteed to defendants under the Fifth, Sixth, and

Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution as well as those guaranteed by the

Texas Constitution. Ex parte Johnson, 654 S.W.2d 415, 420-22 (Tex. 1983). These include

fundamental and essential rights such as the right to be present at trial and confront witnesses and

the right to counsel. See Ex parte Gonzales, 945 S.W.2d 830, 836 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (“We

also note that the right to counsel turns on whether deprivation of liberty may result from a

proceeding, not upon its characterization as criminal or civil.”) (internal quotations omitted); Ex

parte Goodman, 742 S.W.2d 536, 540 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1987, no writ) (“[W]e find it

inescapable that the right to counsel afforded to those accused of a crime by the provisions of the

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure appl[ies] equally to alleged constructive criminal

contemnors.”).

There is “no meaningful distinction between an individual’s rights which are at stake in a

constructive criminal contempt hearing [] and those at stake in an ordinary criminal trial where

confinement is a possible penal sanction.” Ex parte Johnson, 654 S.W.2d at 421. A contemnor’s

failure to appear at a show cause hearing does not constitute the waiver of these rights. Id.; see

also Ex parte Gonzales, 945 S.W.2d at 837 (“[I]t is essential that no criminal defendant be

subjected to formal adversarial judicial proceedings without a lawyer unless there is a basis for

concluding that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently relinquished or abandoned his right

to the assistance of counsel.”) (quoting North Carolina v. Butler, 441 U.S. 369 (1979)). When an

individual is cited for criminal contempt and fails to appear at the appointed time and place, the

-2- 04-25-00296-CV

proper procedure is to bring the individual into court under a capias or a writ of attachment. Ex

parte Johnson, 654 S.W.2d at 422.

It is apparent from the facts presented that relator did not waive his right to be present or

his right to counsel in the criminal contempt proceedings. Nonetheless, respondent sentenced

relator in absentia to two (2) months incarceration constituting a clear violation of his due

process rights. The May 8, 2023 contempt order and the March 16, 2025 commitment order are

void for the reasons stated above.

We grant relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and order Barnes discharged.

-3-