Ex parte Rohleder

• Decision Date: 13 December 1967
• Docket Number: No. B--392,B--392
• Citation: 424 S.W.2d 891
• Parties: Ex parte James J. ROHLEDER, Jr.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 891

424 S.W.2d 891

Ex parte James J. ROHLEDER, Jr.

No. B--392.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Dec. 13, 1967.

James J. Rohleder, pro se.James E. Ferguson and Don Busby, Cleburne, for relator.

Hugh Higgins, Cleburne, for respondent.

GRIFFIN, Justice.

This is an original habeas corpus proceeding.Relator, James J. Rohleder, Jr., has been adjudged in contempt by the 18th District Court of Johnson County for failure to make payments for the support of his minor children as required by the divorce judgment entered by that court on July 22, 1964.The contempt decree fixed the punishment at three days in jail and directed that relator continue in jail until he purged himself by paying the $1835.00 found to be in arrears.We order relator discharged.

Relator was ordered by the divorce decree to make child support payments of $64.00 payable on the 1st and 16th of each month beginning August 1, 1964.The record contains evidence which supports the conclusion that relator was able to pay one or more of the delinquent installments as they accrued and was therefore subject to the punishment authorized by Article 1911, Vernon's Ann.Tex.Civ.Stat., notwithstanding any inability of relator to pay the full amount of the arrearages at the time of the contempt decree.Punishment under this statute, however, is limited to a fine not exceeding $100.00 and imprisonment not exceeding three days.Ex parte De Wees, 146 Tex. 564, 210 S.W.2d 145(1948).It appears that relator remained in jail for more than the three days before being released on bail by order of this Court, and we are now concerned only with the power of the trial court to order the indefinite confinement of relator until the $1835.00 is paid.

In this case there were hearings held on three separate occasions but they were all a part of the one proceeding to hold relator in contempt.On each occasion only relator testified, although the mother of relator's children, who instituted these proceedings, was represented by an attorney on all occasions.On June 30, 1967, after relator had testified that he was in arrears on his support payments because his ex-wife had moved the children several times without notifying him, the court stated that the relator was in contempt for such failure.However, no order was entered; and the court gave relator until July 5, 1967 to raise the $1835.00.On July 5, 1967, the relator testified he had not been successful in his attempts to borrow the amount of his arrearages and requested a few days to attempt to mortgage his mother's house.The court granted this request and delayed the order until July 10, 1967.On July 10, 1967, relator returned to court and testified to his inability to secure this amount from any source.The trial judge then signed the order holding relator in contempt and ordering him confined to jail for three days and thereafter until he purge himself by paying the $1835.00 into court.

An original habeas corpus proceeding in ...