The CCA held the Hidalgo County District Clerk in contempt of court and assessed a $500 fine. That has to be a first.

Details.

It took them over year to do so!!!

JAS

The law is patient.

But not always kind.

I did find it quite civilized of the court to express in a footnote a measure of appreciation to the ADA and deputy clerk for criminal appeals who tendered affidavits.

Considering the number of times that the CCA has been required in the last few years to make inquiries about why 11.07 writs have not been timely sent to Austin, my guess is that the court has been waiting for an appropriate case to make its point more loudly. This seems to be it. The surprising part to me is that a response by the deputy clerk (who probably was assigned the duty of forwarding the paperwork to begin with) was not considered sufficient (although that response may have been quite inadequate in substance). Anyway, is the clerk responsible to pay the fine, or does the county pick up the tab?

The court also clarified the issue about what 35-day time is involved, i.e., that it commences once the state's attorney has been served. Compare ODI time limit

This case arose in Hidalgo County. It had been handled by a former writ prosecutor who worked under my supervision before she retired last June.

When the C.C.A. sent the District Clerk its show cause order last May, that attorney wrote an affidavit responding to the court's inquiry and helped the Criminal Appeals Deputy Clerk prepare another affidavit. The District Clerk reviewed both of those affidavits before they were submitted to the C.C.A., but did not write a personal affidavit.

It would seem that a show cause order from the C.C.A. directed at a county official would get their personal attention (although in my years of experience, I have often been amazed that some attorneys do not take orders from judges more seriously). Nonetheless, it seems a bit harsh to condemn the District Clerk for not personally writing an affidavit. After all, she would have, almost certainly, have said that she had delegated the responsibility for handling the application for writ to her Criminal Appeals Deputy Clerk and then referred the reader to the affidavits prepared by that person and the writ prosecutor.

Moreover, if the District Clerk were now asked about this contempt proceeding, I'm sure she would say that she had not intended any disrespect for the C.C.A. and had believed that the affidavits from those who had been handling the application for writ were sufficient to comply with the show cause order. In fact, I have spoken to both the District Clerk and my former colleague, who both agree that the attorney had told the District Clerk that the affidavits from those personally involved should be sufficient to take care of the show cause order. Thus, in the final analysis, they simply made a miscalculation concerning what the C.C.A. required.

Finally, I would add that I agree with Mr. Peterson that this opinion is beneficial in that it clarifies the issue of when the time limits to answer a writ begin. As mentioned in the previous thread he links to, language in some recent C.C.A. opinions had created some confusion about that issue.

Your background information certainly puts the issue in perspective. I wonder if, with a suitable motion, the CCA would reconsider its order?

JAS