Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond

DecidedJuly 15, 2011

DocketWR-76,146-01

StatusPublished

This text of Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond (Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond, (Tex. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-76,146-01 EX PARTE STEPHANIE L. PEARSON SHOELS

ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FROM CAUSE NO. C-173.776-DCV

IN THE 317^TH DISTRICT COURT

JEFFERSON COUNTY

Per Curiam. Meyers, J., would file and set.

O R D E R

We have before us a motion for leave to file an application for writ of habeas corpus, and an application for writ of habeas corpus.

Applicant alleges that she is currently being held in the Jefferson County Jail for contempt of court arising from violations of a divorce decree and failure to appear at a court-ordered compliance hearing.

This Court has the power to issue the writ of habeas corpus "[s]ubject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law." Tex. Const. art. V, § 5(c). However, this Court will not "entertain an application for writ of habeas corpus where there is an adequate remedy at law." Ex parte Groves, 571 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Texas Supreme Court also has power to issue the writ of habeas corpus "as may be prescribed by law, and under such regulations as may be prescribed by law." Tex. Const. art. V, § 3(a). The Government Code grants power to the court of appeals and the Texas Supreme Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus when it appears that a person's liberty is restrained for violating "an order, judgment, or decree previously made, rendered, or entered by the court or judge" in civil cases. Tex. Gov't. Code §§ 22.002(e), 22.221(d).

Applicant is restrained due to alleged violations of such an order, judgment, or decree previously made by a court or judge in a civil case. Therefore, applicant is denied leave to file in this Court without prejudice to pursue her remedies in other appropriate courts.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JULY, 2011.

Do Not Publish

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

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-76,146-01 EX PARTE STEPHANIE L. PEARSON SHOELS

ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FROM CAUSE NO. C-173.776-DCV

IN THE 317^TH DISTRICT COURT

JEFFERSON COUNTY

Per Curiam. Meyers, J., would file and set.

O R D E R

We have before us a motion for leave to file an application for writ of habeas corpus, and an application for writ of habeas corpus.

Applicant alleges that she is currently being held in the Jefferson County Jail for contempt of court arising from violations of a divorce decree and failure to appear at a court-ordered compliance hearing.

This Court has the power to issue the writ of habeas corpus "[s]ubject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law." Tex. Const. art. V, § 5(c). However, this Court will not "entertain an application for writ of habeas corpus where there is an adequate remedy at law." Ex parte Groves, 571 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Texas Supreme Court also has power to issue the writ of habeas corpus "as may be prescribed by law, and under such regulations as may be prescribed by law." Tex. Const. art. V, § 3(a). The Government Code grants power to the court of appeals and the Texas Supreme Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus when it appears that a person's liberty is restrained for violating "an order, judgment, or decree previously made, rendered, or entered by the court or judge" in civil cases. Tex. Gov't. Code §§ 22.002(e), 22.221(d).

Applicant is restrained due to alleged violations of such an order, judgment, or decree previously made by a court or judge in a civil case. Therefore, applicant is denied leave to file in this Court without prejudice to pursue her remedies in other appropriate courts.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JULY, 2011.

Do Not Publish

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Shoels, Stephanie L. Pearson v. Ron C. La Fond, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shoels-stephanie-l-pearson-v-ron-c-la-fond-texcrimapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack