Pena v. Pena, 99-0321

Citation8 S.W.3d 639
Decision Date02 December 1999
Docket NumberNo. 99-0321,99-0321
Parties(Tex. 1999) Diana S. Pena, Petitioner v. Omar Ismael Pena, Respondent
CourtTexas Supreme Court

On Petition for Review from the Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas

Per Curiam

Petitioner challenges a divorce decree establishing her and her former husband as joint managing conservators of their son. She argues that she presented "credible evidence" of a "history or pattern" of domestic violence, and thus that the trial court could not appoint joint managing conservators under Texas Family Code 153.004(b). In affirming the trial court's judgment, the court of appeals correctly recited that the trial court is vested with wide discretion in determining custody issues. See Gillespie v. Gillespie, 644 S.W.2d 449, 451 (Tex. 1982). However, we disapprove of the following language in the court of appeals' opinion:

In the present case, the two hitting incidents left Diana with a black eye each time. However, Diana's testimony only vaguely connects the two hitting incidents as both having been precipitated by arguments over Omar's ex-wife and daughters. We do not know who initiated the arguments, whether the hittings were provoked in any manner, or what other factors may have contributed to either or both incidents, or any other relevant details that may show a relationship, connection or predictable "pattern" of physical abuse.

986 S.W.2d 696, 699. These considerations are not relevant to determining whether there was physical abuse or a history or pattern of domestic violence under the statute.

The petition for review is denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 cases
  • Rusk State Hosp. v. Black
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • 31 Agosto 2012
  • Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice v. Miller
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • 21 Junio 2001
  • Matter of the Marriage of Parker
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 30 Mayo 2000
    ...rights granted under that rule. See, e.g., Pena v. Pena, 986 S.W.2d 696, 701 (Tex. App.Corpus Christi 1998), pet. denied per curiam, 8 S.W.3d 639 (Tex. 1999) (holding that a party who fails to comply with the mandatory requirements for requesting a judge's recusal waives his right to compla......
  • Spigener v. Wallis
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 12 Junio 2002
    ...Pac. Resources Co., 969 S.W.2d at 428; Pena v. Pena, 986 S.W.2d 696, 700 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1998), pet. denied per curiam, 8 S.W.3d 639 (Tex.1999); McElwee, 911 S.W.2d at 186. In a similar manner, this Court and others have concluded that a trial court's obligation to either recuse hi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT