Ex parte Phillips
| Docket Number | 12-23-00148-CV |
| Decision Date | 21 July 2023 |
| Parties | EX PARTE: MATTHEW RUEBEN PHILLIPS, RELATOR |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the County Court at Law of Cherokee County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. FM2100424)
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
Matthew Rueben Phillips filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which he alleges that he is being illegally detained in the Cherokee County jail.[1] He alleges that the order revoking suspension of a probated contempt sentence violated his right to due process. We grant the writ.
Relator and Real Party in Interest Jessica Marie Phillips (Jessica) were previously married and share a child, S.P. On March 21 2022, Respondent issued Agreed Temporary Orders in which she ordered Relator to pay monthly child support to Jessica for S.P., and maintain health insurance for S.P. Respondent enjoined both parties from alienating any of the parties' property, separate or community, unless specifically authorized, and from signing or endorsing the other party's name on any negotiable instrument. Relator was specifically enjoined from entering or remaining on the premises of the former marital home except by agreement.
On January 17, 2023, Jessica filed a combined Fourth Amended Motion for Enforcement of Temporary Orders and Motion to Compel, alleging multiple violations of the court's Temporary Orders by Relator.[2] On January 20, Respondent held a hearing on the fourth amended enforcement motion,[3] at which Relator and Jessica both appeared with their respective counsel. Jessica and Relator approved the entry of an Agreed Order of Enforcement (the Agreed Order) stating that Relator failed to comply with the Temporary Orders by: (1) failing to timely make the ordered child support payments for September, October, November, and December 2022, (2) failing to make the ordered child support payment for January 2023, (3) failing to maintain health and dental insurance for S.P., (4) removing a horse trailer, as well as a Bobcat Toolcat utility work machine and its accompanying hay spear and bucket, from the marital residence and refusing to return same upon demand, (5) selling the horse trailer, (6) depositing the check from the sale of the horse trailer into an account to which Jessica had no access and (7) accessing the former marital residence without agreement on May 27, 2022. Regarding the Motion to Compel, the parties further agreed on the record that Relator failed to provide complete responses and documents in response to production requests served upon him and agreed that Relator would produce documents responsive to the production requests on or before February 10, 2023.
Respondent entered the written Agreed Order on February 10 and found Relator in civil contempt for each of the violations of the Temporary Orders. Respondent imposed a sentence of confinement in the Cherokee County jail for 180 days or until Relator complied with certain of the court's orders, namely: (1) pay the January 2023 child support on or before January 23, (2) obtain a health and dental insurance policy covering S.P. and provide proof of such to Jessica on or before January 23, (3) post bond of $5,000.00 to secure the payment of monthly child support with the District Clerk of Cherokee County on or before February 1, (4) pay $8,027.00 in attorney's fees to Jessica's counsel on or before sixty days from the hearing, (5) timely pay the ordered monthly child support to Jessica going forward, and (6) comply with all other terms of the Temporary Orders. However, Respondent suspended Relator's sentence and placed Relator on 120 months of probation, conditioned upon Relator's compliance with the above orders as terms of said probation.
On February 10, the same day Respondent entered the Agreed Order, Jessica moved to revoke the suspension of Relator's commitment, alleging that Relator did not make the January child support payment on or before January 23, obtain a health and dental insurance policy covering S.P. and provide proof thereof on or before January 23, or post the ordered $5,000.00 bond on or before February 1. Jessica filed an amended motion to revoke on April 6, adding allegations that Relator did not timely make the April 2023 child support payment, pay the $8,027.00 in attorney's fees to Jessica's counsel on or before sixty days from the hearing, or comply with the production requests on or before February 10.
On April 10, Respondent held a hearing on Jessica's motion to revoke, at which both parties appeared with counsel. Respondent found that Relator violated the terms of his suspended commitment and the order to comply with the production requests. However, as of the hearing date, Relator had already made the outstanding child support payments to Jessica, posted the ordered bond with the District Clerk of Cherokee County, and provided evidence of health insurance (though not dental insurance) for S.P. Relator paid the outstanding $8,027.00 in attorney's fees in open court. Respondent ordered Relator to comply with the outstanding production requests on or before April 17, and pay an additional $3,160.00 in attorney fees to Jessica's counsel as a condition of his suspended commitment. Respondent stated in her Order on Motion to Revoke, signed April 12, that she would take under advisement "any other punishment, sanctions, and the continued suspension of commitment under advisement" pending a review of Relator's further compliance with the court's orders. Finally, Respondent ordered that if Relator was late or delinquent in any other payments due under the orders, Jessica's counsel was authorized to file an affidavit setting forth the non-compliance and non-payment, along with a writ of commitment to revoke Relator's suspended commitment and incarcerate him for a period of six months.
On May 8, Respondent entered an order revoking Relator's suspension and ordering his commitment to the Cherokee County jail.[4] The order specified that Relator failed to comply with court's order of April 12, 2023, ordering him to provide documents responsive to the outstanding production requests by April 17. Relator was thereafter committed to custody of the Cherokee County jail. This petition followed. We granted Relator's motion for bond, ordering that he be released from commitment upon posting of a $10,000.00 cash bond.
Habeas corpus is available to review a contempt order entered by a lower court confining a contemnor. Ex parte Gordon, 584 S.W.2d 686, 687-88 (Tex. 1979) (orig. proceeding). The purpose of a habeas corpus proceeding is not to determine the ultimate guilt or innocence of the relator, but only to ascertain whether the relator has been unlawfully confined. Id. at 688; In re Mann, 162 S.W.3d 429, 432 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2005, orig. proceeding). A writ of habeas corpus will issue if the order underlying the contempt order is void or if the contempt order itself is void. See Ex parte Shaffer, 649 S.W.2d 300, 302 (Tex. 1983) (orig. proceeding). In a habeas corpus proceeding, the order or judgment being challenged is presumed to be valid. In re R.E.D., 278 S.W.3d 850, 855 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, orig. proceeding); In re Turner, 177 S.W.3d 284, 288 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, orig. proceeding). The relator must show that the order is void and not merely voidable. In re Munks, 263 S.W.3d 270, 272-73 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, orig. proceeding). A contempt order is void if it deprives the relator of liberty without due process of law or if it exceeded the power of the court to issue. See In re Coppock, 277 S.W.3d 417, 418 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding).
Relator argues that the May 8, 2023, Order Revoking Suspension and for Commitment to County Jail is void because it violates his right to due process.
A trial court may enforce by contempt any provision of a temporary or final order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 157.001 (West 2023). There are two forms of contempt: civil and criminal. A criminal contempt order is punitive in nature and is an exertion of the court's inherent power to punish a party for "some completed act which affronted the dignity and authority of the court." Ex parte Johns, 807 S.W.2d 768, 771 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1991, orig. proceeding) (quoting Ex parte Werblud, 536 S.W.2d 542, 545 (Tex. 1976)) (orig. proc.)). Criminal contempt orders generally require the individual to be incarcerated for a finite period and that period is unaffected by the individual's performance of any future act. In re Scariati, 988 S.W.2d 270, 272 n.1 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 1998, orig. proceeding); Ex parte Hosken, 480 S.W.2d 18, 23 (Tex. Civ. App.-Beaumont 1972, orig. proceeding). In criminal contempt proceedings, the contemnor is being punished for his improper actions "and no subsequent voluntary compliance on the part of the defendant can enable him to avoid punishment for his past acts." Ex parte Johns, 807 S.W.2d at 771 (quoting Ex parte Hosken, 480 S.W.2d at 23). A judge can impose a fine or imprisonment or both in a criminal contempt order. Id. The distinguishing feature of criminal contempt is that the penalty is unconditional. Id.
Texas courts have consistently held that contemnors whose alleged contemptuous behavior occurred outside of court are entitled to procedural due process protections before they may be held in contempt. In re Zandi, 270 S.W.3d 76, 77 (Tex. 2008). 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...
To continue reading
Request your trial