In Re: Sebra Proutt and Rashad White v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 25, 2024
Docket05-24-01063-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re: Sebra Proutt and Rashad White v. the State of Texas (In Re: Sebra Proutt and Rashad White 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.

Bluebook
In Re: Sebra Proutt and Rashad White v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

DENIED and Opinion Filed September 25, 2024

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-01063-CV

IN RE SEBRA PROUTT AND RASHAD WHITE, Relators

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1 Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1-24-1007

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Carlyle, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Breedlove Before the Court is relators’ September 9, 2024 pro se petition for writ of

habeas corpus. Relators ask this Court to compel the trial court to return their

children.

To the extent that the petition is filed pro se by relator Sebra Proutt, we decline

to consider it because she has been appointed an attorney ad litem. See In re Jones,

No. 04-06-00026-CV, 2006 WL 286782, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Feb. 8,

2006, orig. proceeding) (explaining that absence of right to hybrid representation

means relator’s pro se petition for writ of mandamus will be treated as presenting

nothing for Court’s consideration). Relators’ petition also does not comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure in numerous respects. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1; TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(a)–

(c), (e)–(k); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). Thus, relator’s petition does not meet the

requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure for consideration of

mandamus relief. See In re Guillaume, No. 05-24-00765-CV, 2024 WL 3548511, at

*1 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 26, 2024, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (denying

mandamus relief based on relator’s failure to comply with several Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure).

Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition.

Additionally, based on our review, relators’ petition for writ of mandamus

contains unredacted sensitive data, including minors’ full names, in violation of

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.9. Accordingly, we

also strike relators’ petition.

241063f.p05 /Maricela Breedlove/ MARICELA BREEDLOVE JUSTICE

–2–

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re: Sebra Proutt and Rashad White v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sebra-proutt-and-rashad-white-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.