In the Interest of B.D.

Texas Supreme Court

In the Interest of B.D.

53 S.W.3d 327, 2000 Tex. LEXIS 103, 2000 WL 1784627

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 7, 2000

DocketNo. 00-0629

StatusPublished

This text of 53 S.W.3d 327 (In the Interest of B.D.) 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

In the Interest of B.D., 53 S.W.3d 327, 2000 Tex. LEXIS 103, 2000 WL 1784627 (Tex. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Justice Owen,

joined by Justice Hecht, concurring in the denial of petition for review.

The significant issue in this case is whether the juvenile court had jurisdiction under Texas Family Code sections 55.01 and 55.02¹ to order mental health proceedings for a person over the age of 18 when he appeared before the court at a hearing to determine whether he should be transferred from the Texas Youth Commission to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division. However, the Court cannot reach this issue because it was not properly preserved in the trial court. The court of appeals should not have addressed the issue for the same reason. 16 S.W.3d 77 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000). Had the issue been preserved, I would have been in favor of granting this petition for review.

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

Justice Owen,

joined by Justice Hecht, concurring in the denial of petition for review.

The significant issue in this case is whether the juvenile court had jurisdiction under Texas Family Code sections 55.01 and 55.02¹ to order mental health proceedings for a person over the age of 18 when he appeared before the court at a hearing to determine whether he should be transferred from the Texas Youth Commission to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division. However, the Court cannot reach this issue because it was not properly preserved in the trial court. The court of appeals should not have addressed the issue for the same reason. 16 S.W.3d 77 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000). Had the issue been preserved, I would have been in favor of granting this petition for review.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 S.W.3d 327, 2000 Tex. LEXIS 103, 2000 WL 1784627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-bd-tex-2000.