David Dow's Petition For Declaration Judgment Or, in The Alternative, Writ of Mandamus

No.
_______
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN RE DAVID DOW,
Relator-Petitioner,
v.
THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS,
Respondent.
________________________________
DAVID DOWS PETITION FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, WRIT OF MANDAMUS
________________________________
Nicole DeBorde
TBN: 00787344
712 Main St., Ste 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 713-526-6300
Fax: 713-228-0034
Email: Nicole@debordelawfirm.com
Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
440 Louisiana, Suite 800
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
Email: casie.gotro@gmail.com
Attorneys for Relator/Petitioner
David Dow
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

Relator/Petitioner certifies the following is a complete list of the parties and
their attorneys in accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 53.2(a).
Respondent:
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Relator/Petitioner:
David R. Dow
TBN: 06064900
University of Houston Law Center
100 Law Center
Houston, Texas 77204-6060
TEL: (713) 743-2171
FAX: (713) 743-2131
Counsel for Relator/Petitioner:
Nicole DeBorde
TBN: 00787344
Office: 713-526-6300
Fax: 713-228-0034
Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL ........................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................................iv
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES.....................................................................................vi
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................................................................. 1
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.......................................................................... 2
ISSUES PRESENTED............................................................................................... 3
STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................ 4
ARGUMENT.. ........................................................................................... 9
I.
In suspending Dow, the CCA purported to exercise

authority that is reserved to this Court. ........................................................... 9
A.
Contempt of court ................................................................................ 10
B.
Power to sanction ................................................................................ 10
II.
The ability to suspend an attorney absent fraudulent or

dishonorable conduct or malpractice is within the
exclusive jurisdiction of this Court....................................................13
III.
Mandamus is appropriate............................................................................... 16
IV.
Declaratory judgment is appropriate. ............................................................ 19
PRAYER FOR RELIEF .......................................................................................... 21

CERTIFICATION. .......................................................................................... 22
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ....................................................................... 22
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ................................................................................ 22
ii
APPENDIX ....................................................................................... A-001
iii
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Bonham State Bank v. Beadle,
907 S.W.2d 465 (Tex. 1995) ......................................................................... 20
Brager v. State,
No. 0365-03, 2004 WL 3093237 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 13,
2004) .............................................................................................................. 11
Chenault v. Phillips,
914 S.W.2d 140 (Tex. 1996) ........................................................................... 3
Christeson v. Roper,
135 S. Ct. 891 (2015)....................................................................................... 7
Eichelberger v. Eichelberger,
582 S.W.2d 395 (Tex. 1979) ....................................................................... 2, 9
Etan Indus. v. Lehmann,
359 S.W.3d 620 (Tex. 2011) ......................................................................... 21
Harbison v. Bell,
556 U.S. 180 (2009)....................................................................................... 18
In re Bennett,
960 S.W.2d 35 (Tex. 1997) ..................................................................... 10-11
In re Caballero,
441 S.W.3d 562 (Tex. App.El Paso, no pet.) .............................................. 9
In re Paredes,
587 F. Appx 805 (5th Cir. 2014) .................................................................... 7
In re State Bar,
113 S.W.3d 730 (Tex. 2003) ...............................................................9, 15, 18
Kutch v. Del Mar College,
831 S.W.2d 506 (Tex. App.Corpus Christi 1992, no writ) ....................... 11
iv
Mills v. Ghilain,
68 S.W.3d 141 (Tex. App.Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) ............................ 9
State Bar of Texas v. Gomez.
891 S.W.2d 243 (Tex. 1994) .................................................................2, 9, 14
Tabler v. Stephens,
No. 12-70013, 2015 WL 327646 (5th Cir. Jan. 27, 2015) .............................. 7
TransAmerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Powell,
811 S.W.2d 913 (Tex. 1991) ......................................................................... 12
Walker v. Packer,
827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) ......................................................................... 16
Rules and Statutes
5TH CIR. R. 8.10 ......................................................................................................... 8
18 U.S.C. 3599 ...................................................................................................... 18
TEX. CONST. art. II ................................................................................................. 2, 9
TEX. CONST. art. V ............................................................................................... 3, 14
TEX. CRIM. APP. MISC. R. 11-003 (Exhibit B) ........................................................... 8
TEX. GOVT CODE 21.002...................................................................................... 10
TEX. GOVT CODE 22.108...................................................................................... 16
TEX. GOVT CODE 81.011..............................................................................2, 9, 14
TEX. GOVT CODE 81.072.................................................................................. 9, 14
TEX. GOVT CODE 82.061...................................................................................... 10
TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE 37.003.................................................................... 3
v
TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.071 ......................................................................... 17

TEX. R. DISCIPLINARY Preamble. ....................................................................... 14-15
vi
STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Nature of the case:
CCA case
information:
On January 14, 2015, in a per curiam1 order, the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) issued an order
sanctioning David Dow and suspending him from
practicing before the CCA, without leave of court, for
one year. See Exhibit A. Dow seeks review of this
order because the CCA lacks the lawful authority to
suspend Dow. Only the Texas Supreme Court, under
appropriate circumstances, may suspend a lawyer
licensed by the State Bar of Texas. Even if the CCA had
such authority (which it does not,) its order further
deprived Dow his right to due course of law guarantee of
the Texas Constitution and his right to due process of law
guarantee by United States Constitution.3
IN RE DAVID DOW, CAUSE NO. WR-61,939-01
Motion for rehearing:
Dow filed a Motion for Rehearing on January 29, 2015.

In a five to four decision, the CCA denied the motion for
rehearing on February 25, 2015.
The dissenting
statements of Judges Alcala, Newell, and Richardson
(joined by Johnson) are attached as Exhibits C, D, and E,
respectively.
Relief requested:
Declaratory relief stating that the order of suspension

issued by the CCA is unlawful. In the alternative, a writ
of mandamus, directing the CCA to withdraw the invalid
order.
Judge Alcala dissented and would not have suspended Dow.
Dow further contends that the CCA erroneously concluded that he violated the courts
Miscellaneous Rule 11-003 and failed to show good cause.
vii
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Texas Supreme Court has jurisdiction because:
(1)
Pursuant to Article V, section 3 of the Texas Constitution, this Court has

the power to issue writs of mandamus necessary to enforce its
jurisdiction even permitting the issuance of a writ of mandamus to the
CCA. TEX. CONST. Art. V, 3(a).4 Relator has no adequate remedy by
appeal and thus mandamus is the appropriate remedy. In re Coy Reece,
341 S.W.3d 360, 54 (2011). This is the only Court which can provide the
relief to which Relator is constitutionally entitled.
(2)
This Court has exclusive authority to regulate the practice of law. TEX.
CONST. art. II, 1; TEX. GOVT CODE 81.011(c); see Eichelberger v.
Eichelberger, 582 S.W.2d 395, 398-99 (Tex. 1979).
(3)
The State Bar Act further provides this Court has administrative control
over the State Bar and provides a statutory mechanism for promulgating
regulations governing the practice of law. State Bar of Texas v. Gomez,
891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994) (citing TEX. GOVT CODE 81.011(c)).
(4)
Chapter 37 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code grants the Court the
authority to issue a declaratory judgment that has the force and effect of a
final judgment or decree in this case because the Court has jurisdiction
over the regulation of the practice of law. 5 TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.
CODE 37.003(a).
Section 3(a) adds that [t]he Legislature may confer original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court
to issue writs of quo warranto and mandamus in such cases as may be specified, except as
against the Governor. Tex. Const. Art. V, 3(a). The Legislature has conferred additional
jurisdiction to this Court pursuant to section 3(a). Moreover, while the additional jurisdiction
conferred by statute expressly excludes the CCA as subject to a mandamus issued by this Court,
the statute does not and cannot deprive this Court of its constitutionally-conferred
jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction permits this Court to issue a writ of mandamus to the CCA.
5
The Court has held that district courts have jurisdiction in some cases to issue declaratory
judgments related to this Courts power to regulate the bar when those judgments are concerning
a judicial (and not administrative) matter. Chenault v. Phillips, 914 S.W.2d 140, 142 (Tex.
1996). However, because the matter presented in this petition concerns whether the Texas Court
of Criminal Appeals had the authority to sanction Dow in the manner it did, the matter is
viii
ISSUES PRESENTED
I.
Whether the Texas Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to either enter a
declaratory judgment or issue a writ of mandamus declaring that the
CCA impermissibly exceeded its statutory and constitutional authority
when it suspended Dow from the practice of law?
II.
Whether the CCA exceeded its authority and violated Dows

constitutional rights, when it issued an order suspending him from the
practice of law, absent fraudulent or dishonorable conduct or malpractice,
because the ability to exact such a sanction is within exclusive
jurisdiction of the Texas Supreme Court and the CCA further failed to
give Dow his due course and process of law?
properly brought only in this Court. All lower courts are inferior to the CCA and incapable of
declaring the CCA lacked the authority to sanction Dow in the manner that it did because
procedurally, an appeal is a review by a superior court of an inferior court's decision. White v.
State, 543 S.W.2d 366, 368 (Tex.Crim.App.1976) Republic v. Smith, Dallam 407, 409
(Tex.1841)
ix
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. Dows Work on Paredes Death Penalty Case Leading Up to the Improper
Suspension.
David Dow regularly represents on appeal individuals who have been
sentenced to death. Many of Dows death penalty cases are taken pro bono, and
those that are not pro bono are appointed and only partially billed. Dow performs
this work through the UH Law Center Death Penalty Clinic and the Texas
Innocence Network.
Dow (along with co-counsel Jeffrey Newberry, who is not a party to these
proceedings) represented Miguel Paredes, a Texas death row inmate who was
executed on October 28, 2014. See Show Cause Order, Exhibit F. After agreeing to
represent Paredes in August 2014, Dow and his team undertook an extensive
investigation in an extremely limited period of time. Statement of David R. Dow
pursuant to Miscellaneous Rule 11-003, and Timeline Exhibits G and H Dows
work included locating and reviewing medical records, locating and interviewing
witnesses, evaluating extensive documentation from all phases of Mr. Paredes
case, and researching previously unaddressed legal issues. Statement of David R.
Dow pursuant to Miscellaneous Rule 11-003, and Timeline Exhibits G and H.
Paredes first contacted Dow in May 2014, after his execution had been
scheduled. See Motion For Leave to File with Timeline, Exhibit I at 5. Paredes
1
wrote and explained he had been under psychiatric care and was in fact suicidal at
the time he waived his Wiggins claim, and requested assistance of counsel. Id. In
August, Dow contacted Parades and Paredess federally-appointed habeas counsel,
who accepted Dows offer to substitute in as lead counsel for any additional
litigation and promptly handed over the case file. Id. Dows delay in reaching to
Parades was due to his heavy caseload. Also in August, Dow was granted an
extension on a state habeas application for another death row client, which had
been his primary focus throughout the summer because of that cases deadlines.
Order Granting Extension, Exhibit J. In addition, Dow was involved in preparing
federal pleadings for two other death row clients.
The pro bono investigation by Dow and his team revealed a variety of new
issues to be considered and developed. Suggestion to Reconsider, Exhibit K. To
begin with, Dow discovered previously undisclosed medical records. Id. at 6-7.
These records revealed that Paredes had been under psychiatric care and was
receiving psychiatric medication both at the time of his trial and during state
habeas corpus proceedings. Id. It was also learned that Paredes suffered from
mental illness for most if not all of his life. Id. at 9-10. These facts were not
revealed in any transcripts of the proceedings and were unknown to the courts. See
id. at 8-9. Indeed, the jury that sentenced Paredes to death was unaware of either
his history of mental illness, or the fact he was receiving mental health treatment at
2
the time of his trial. See id. at 9-10. In fact, Paredess trial lawyers called no
witnesses at all at the punishment phase of his trial (XX R.R. at 124-26, State v.
Paredes, No. 2000-CR-6067B (Bexar County 399th Dist. Ct. Oct. 24, 2001).
When a capital murder defendants trial counsel presents no evidence aimed
to persuade the jury to spare the life of the client, the death row inmate has a
potential claim under Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003). In Paredess case,
however, at a brief hearing held in the state court following his conviction and
sentence of death, Paredes purported to waive his Wiggins claim. Exhibit K at 8-9.
At the time, Paredes remained under psychiatric care, although the court which
permitted his waiver was unaware of this fact. See id.
Having learned that Paredes was incompetent when he waived his Wiggins
claim, Dow investigated further. Id. at 9-10. Previous counsel did not investigate
for evidence of a Wiggins claim. See id. Throughout September and the first half
of October, counsel obtained and reviewed medical, prison, and educational
records, and located and interviewed approximately a half dozen witnesses who
possessed salient information about Paredess background and could have been
called as witnesses at the punishment phase of Paredes's trial. Id.; Exhibit I at 5.
All of this information had to be located, considered, and applied in a legal context
because again, his trial lawyers did not call any witnesses during the punishment
phase of the trial.
3
The newly obtained medical records revealed the specific medications that
Paredes was taking at the time of trial and during the state habeas hearing where he
purported to waive his Wiggins claim. During trial, unbeknownst to the court or
the jury, Paredes was receiving strong antidepressant and antipsychotic
medications, often in conjunction with one another.
Exhibit K at 7.
medications included Doxepin, Torazine, Mellaril, and Xanax.
Id.
These
And,
throughout the state habeas proceedings, Paredes was being treated with
antidepressant medications, including Bupropion and Wellbutrin.
Id. at 6.
Another fact of which the court was unaware. Finally, Dow and Newberry were
able to obtain additional affidavits suggesting that Paredes likely suffered from
mental illness from the time he was very young. Id. at 10.
Counsel also learned significant facts about Paredess background, that had
also not been previously discovered and were unknown to the sentencing jury as
well as the state and federal courts which reviewed his case. For example, when
Paredes was seven years old, his family was chased out of Chicago and forced to
move to Mexico because his older brothers were involved in a war with a Chicago
gang. Id. After living in Mexico for several years, Paredes and his family moved
to San Antonio where gang violence was as bad as it had been in Chicago. Id.
Paredes was run over by a car driven by gang members when he was only eleven
years old. Id. These facts are examples of the newly discovered mitigating
4
evidence that should have been presented to a jury considering the death penalty.
See, e.g., Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003).
Having determined that the underlying Wiggins claim was meritorious, and
that the purported waiver of that claim did not comport with the dictates of due
process, Dow filed a motion to reopen federal habeas proceedings pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60 and litigated the matter through the Fifth
Circuit. See Paredes v. Stephens, No. 5:05-cv-00870-FB, ECF No. 25; In re
Paredes, 587 F. Appx 805 (5th Cir. 2014).11
In addition to the federal pleadings, Dow filed two pleadings in the state
court. One asked the CCA, on its own motion, to reopen the proceedings where it
had permitted Paredes to waive his Wiggins claim. Exhibit K. The other, filed at
the request of Paredess previous counsel, raised a claim of actual innocence,
which rested on two affidavits obtained by Paredess previous counsel. Subsequent
Application, Exhibit L. All of the above pro bono, highly specialized legal work
occurred in the less than three remaining months of Paredess life. Exhibit I at 5-6.
11
Although the Fifth Circuit subsequently denied Paredes relief, it appears likely that had
Paredess Rule 60 motion been considered by the Fifth Circuit three months later, the court
would have held differently, in view of the Supreme Courts subsequent decision in Christeson v.
Roper, 135 S. Ct. 891 (2015). In Tabler v. Stephens, No. 12-70013, 2015 WL 327646, at *1 (5th
Cir. Jan. 27, 2015), in a case procedurally identical to Paredess, the Fifth Circuit withdrew its
previous order which had denied Tabler Rule 60 relief and held that, under Christeson, he was
entitled to develop the merits of his underlying claim. The claim Paredes raised was
indistinguishable from the claim Christeson raised in the Supreme Court.
There are very few attorneys willing to take on the task of this very time
consuming and difficult work. Had Dow and his team not agreed to assist Mr.
Paredes, it is unlikely that Mr. Paredes would have had anyone present
the
complex legal and factual issues raised by Dow and his team, and the grounds that
Dow raised are a settled basis for a new trial if proved in post-conviction
proceedings.
II. The Alleged Rule Violation.
Paredes was scheduled for execution on October 28, 2014.
Counsel filed in the
CCA documents on Mr. Paredes's behalf seven days in advance on October 21,
2014. Motions for Stay of Execution, Exhibits M and N. This was in compliance
with the CCAs Miscellaneous Rule 11-003, which requires that pleadings
requesting the court stay an execution be filed seven days before an execution.
(emphasis added). Using counting methods, such as those employed by the
analogous Fifth Circuit rule, and by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,
Dows filing was timely. Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6.(a)(1); 5th Cir.
R. 8.10, which states in part that in death penalty issues, filers must exercise
reasonable diligence in moving for a certificate of appealability, for permission to
file a second or successive habeas petition, or in filing a notice of appeal from an
adverse judgment of the district court in any other type of proceeding, and a stay of
6
execution with the clerk of this court at least 7days before the scheduled execution.
Dows Appearance Before the CCA and the CCAs Subsequent Order of Suspension.
Despite the fact that the language in Rule 11-003 is analogous to the Fifth
Circuit rule (and Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 4.1(a)) and the CCA express
statement that rule is modeled upon an analogous rule adopted by the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeal, see Misc. R. 11-003, Exhibit J at 2, the CCA interpreted Rule
11-003 differently. On November 19, 2014, the CCA issued a Notice to Appear
and Show Cause Order directing Dow and Newberry to appear in court on January
14, 2015 to explain why they should not be sanctioned for violation of
Miscellaneous Rule 11-003. See Exhibit F. In concluding that Dow was untimely,
the CCA relied upon an example contained within the rules that purportedly
indicated that such documents actually needed to be filed eight days before an
execution. Misc Rule 11-003.
Even though Dow disagreed with the CCAs construction of the rule, he
complied with the request to show cause and filed a statement explaining why
counsel was not able to file the pleadings within eight days of the execution.
Exhibits G and H,
Then on January 14, 2015, Dow appeared before the CCA.
See Show Cause Transcript, Exhibit O. A court reporter did not transcribe the
7
proceedings, but, there was an audio recording.
It is attached as Exhibit P.
Moreover, undersigned counsel has also attached a certified transcription of the

audio from this proceeding for the Courts convenience as Exhibit O. During the
appearance, Dow is asked questions by various judges and he attempts to answer
the questions. Most of the questions appear to have come from Judge Keller.
Exhibit P And, owing to the inquiry into Judge Keller's actions following the
execution of Michael Richard in 2007 that was conducted by the State Commission
of Judicial Conduct, significant tension developed between Dow and Judge Keller,
leading Dow to request that Judge Keller recuse herself in several cases where he
was counsel as a result of her perceived bias toward him. Exhibit P and V In this
proceeding, the CCA acted as prosecutor, judge and witness. See Exhibit P,
Hearing Audio Indeed, no other witnesses were called nor sworn and there is no
testimony in the usual sense given.
Neither was there an attorney present
representing either the CCA or the State Bar of Texas.

The CCA issued a written order on the same day of the open court
proceedings. It held that Dow had violated Rule 11-003 and that he had not shown
good cause for doing so. Exhibit A As punishment, the CCA suspended Dow from
appearing before it, absent leave, for a period of one year. Exhibit A. On January
29, and for the first time represented by counsel, Dow filed a motion for rehearing.
Exhibit Q, Motion for Rehearing. The CCA, in a split decision, denied the motion
8
for rehearing on February 25, 2015. See Exhibits C, D, and E.

ARGUMENT
I. The Texas Supreme Court Has Jurisdiction to Issue a Declaratory
Judgment Regarding Dows Ability to Practice Law, or in the Alternative,
Issue a Writ of Mandamus Against the CCA for Exceeding Its Authority.
A. The Court has the Authority to Issue a Declaratory Judgment.
The Texas Supreme Court has jurisdiction over disciplinary actions. And,
because a declaration would resolve the underlying controversy, a declaratory
judgment is appropriate. Bonham State Bank v. Beadle, 907 S.W.2d 465, 467
(Tex. 1995); see Etan Indus. v. Lehmann, 359 S.W.3d 620, 624 (Tex. 2011).
Declaratory relief is necessary in this case to avoid immediate injury to
Dow's clients. See Exhibit R, Dow's current practice consists primarily of the pro
bono representation of death-sentenced inmates in federal habeas proceedings.
Exhibit R. The CCA's unlawful suspension order has significant potential impact
on Dow's clients because each of Texas four federal district courts require that
Dow report the suspension. 14 In addition, a disciplinary violation permits the
14
See S.D. TEX. DISCIPLINE R. 3(A) (A lawyer disciplined by another court in the United
States shall promptly notify this court in writing and furnish to the clerk of the court a certified
copy of the order of discipline. A lawyer suspended or disbarred by another court in the United
States shall immediately cease to practice before this court.); N.D. TEX. R. 83.8(d) (Any
member of the bar of this court who has been disciplined, publicly or privately, by any court
shall promptly report such fact in writing to the clerk, supplying full details and copies of all
pertinent documents reflecting, or explaining, such action.); E.D. TEX. R. AT-2(b)(1) (A
member of the bar of this court shall automatically lose his or her membership if he or she loses,
federal courts to impose reciprocal discipline. For example, the clerk for the
Southern District of Texas took action to terminate Dows filing privileges in that
district.17 Exhibit S In the Northern District, a hearing for one of his clients has
been postponed as the district judge in that case awaits a decision from the
districts chief judge regarding whether reciprocal discipline will be imposed.
Exhibit T Accordingly, without relief, Dow and his clients will suffer irreparable
harm if Dow is not accorded a right of appeal to the unlawful sanction.
The Court Has the Authority to Issue a Writ of Mandamus.
The Court has held that a relator should not seek mandamus unless the error
is of such importance to the jurisprudence of the state that it requires correction by
the Texas Supreme Court. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839 n.7 (Tex.
1992).
This case presents an error that rises to that degree of importance.
Additionally, the Texas Constitution gives this Court mandamus power. Texas
either temporarily or permanently, the right to practice law before any state or federal court for
any reason other than nonpayment of dues, failure to meet continuing legal education
requirements, or voluntary resignation unrelated to a disciplinary proceeding or problem.);
W.D. TEX. R. AT-7(e)(2) (A member of the bar of this court must promptly report in writing to
the clerk, with full details and copies of pertinent documents, if the attorney loses or
relinquishes, temporarily or permanently, the right to practice in any court of record.).
17
This appears to be an action automatically taken by the clerks office (and not an indication
that any disciplinary panel has decided to impose reciprocal discipline). See S.D. TEX.
DISCIPLINE R. 3(A). Counsel anticipates a similar response from the Eastern District may be
forthcoming, See E.D. TEX. R. AT-2(b)(3) (The clerk will thereafter enter a reciprocal order
effective in the courts of this district.)
10
Const. Art. 5, 3 To the extent that Texas Government Code Section 22.002,
which limits the authority of this Court to mandamus the CCA is in conflict with
the Texas Constitution, the separation of powers requirement of the Constitution
has been violated because the it would prevent the this Court from exercising its
constitutionally assigned powers. Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d 10, 28 (Tex.Crim.App.
2014)
The Court of Criminal Appeals has the authority to promulgate procedural
rules. Tex. Govt Code 22.108. However, its rules may not abridge, enlarge, or
modify the substantive rights of a litigant. Id. 22.108(a).
Even with the
additional pleading, Dow filed the documents he filed on behalf of Paredes in the
CCA by 6:30 p.m. on October 21, 2014 seven days before Mr. Paredes was
executed, and even by the eighth day standard, only half an hour into the eighth
day.
Even considering Dows reasons filed with the CCA for the late filing,
the CCA still found that good cause did not exist to file the pleadings at most half
an hour late. See Exhibit C. The CCAs extraordinary construction of the rule,
and decision that the penalty for the filing would be a one year suspension will
undoubtedly cause other attorneys in Dows position to decide not to file
documents for inmates facing execution. See Exhibit C at 10-11 (This Courts
contempt order also carries with it the possibility of a chilling effect on attorneys
11
who might otherwise be willing to represent capital-murder defendants who are

facing execution and are in need of competent counsel.). As a result, people may
die, some of them innocent, with valid claims their court appointed and publicly
paid lawyers failed to develop out of fear of sanction by the CCA. This result
would be at odds with the legislative objective, evidenced in Article 11.071 section
5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that such inmates be allowed to file
subsequent applications. Had the Legislature intended there to be a time limit
pertaining to an inmates right to seek to file a subsequent application, for postconviction relief, it could have enacted one. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art.
11.071 4(a) (setting a filing deadline for an initial application).
Furthermore, this penalty imposed on Dow is already interfering with and
will likely interfere further, with his duties and to inmates rights to pursue relief in
the federal courts. Dow currently represents at least twelve death-sentenced Texas
defendants in their federal habeas proceedings. Exhibit R (Dows Affidavit). Dow
was appointed to represent these individuals pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3599.
Pursuant to that federal statute, Dow is obligated to represent those individuals
throughout every subsequent stage of available judicial proceedings, including
all available post-conviction process, together with applications for says of
execution and other appropriate motions and procedures. 18 U.S.C. 3599 (e);
see also Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180 (2009). Fulfilling these obligations often
12
requires federal habeas counsel to return to the CCA to exhaust state remedies.
Dows suspension therefore interferes with the duty he owes to his clients whose
cases are pending in the federal courts.
In addition, there exists a possibility that each of the federal district courts in
this state may decided to impose reciprocal discipline upon Dow and suspend him
from practicing for one year. This action would not be based on any finding that
Dow conducted himself in any inappropriate manner in the federal courts. Rather,
this discipline would be imposed reciprocally, out of respect for the CCAs
sanction a sanction that it lacked the authority to impose because a federal court
expects a member of its bar to be in good standing in state court. See Standing
Order from Northern District, Exhibit U.
This Court has consistently granted mandamus relief when a lower court
interferes with the disciplinary process. In re State Bar, 113 S.W.3d at 733. The
court that has interfered with the disciplinary process in this case is the Court of
Criminal Appeals.
Due process requires that there must be a remedy. The
contempt punishment in Dows case, while not a lawful contempt punishment, is

both punitive or criminal and coercive or civil (requiring him to seek leave to file
before the court). In re Coy Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. 2010) The CCA
exceeded its contempt authority.
13
The CCA Erred In Suspending Dow from the Practice of Law.

There can be no doubt that the CCAs order suspending Dow from
practicing law before the court is an attempt to regulate his practice of law. Yet,
the Texas Supreme Texas Supreme Court has the exclusive authority to do so. The
CCAs attempt to avoid usurping this authority by labeling it as punishment for
contempt or a sanction is nothing but a game of semantics. There is no basis in the
law or the fact that would support the severe sanction of suspension for the alleged
one day late filing of documents that literally could change the course of whether a
person lives or dies. The power to sanction is allowed to the extent necessary to
deter, alleviate, and counteract bad faith abuse of judicial process, such as any
significant interference with traditional core functions of court. Kutch v. Del Mar
College, 831 S.W.2d 506, 510 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1992, no writ) There is
no way to construe the barely late, if it was late, filing as to interfere with the core
functions of the CCA in a significant way, so the CCAs punishment is also not an
appropriate sanction. Accordingly, the CCA exceeded its authority and its order
suspending Dow from practicing before the CCA should be vacated.
A. The Texas Supreme Court Has the Exclusive Authority to Regulate the
Practice of Law and Has Set Forth a Detailed Process for Disciplining
Lawyers.
The Texas Supreme Court has exclusive authority to regulate the practice of
14
law. TEX. CONST. art. II, 1; TEX. GOVT CODE 81.011(c); see Eichelberger, 582
S.W.2d at 398-99. The Constitution states that:
The Supreme Court is responsible for the efficient administration of
the judicial branch and shall promulgate rules of administration not
inconsistent with the laws of the state as may be necessary for the
efficient and uniform administration of justice in the various courts.
TEX. CONST. art. V, 31; see also TEX. GOVT CODE 81.072(a), 81.011(c). The
Tex. Rules Disciplinary Procedure preamble recognizes this authority:
The
Supreme Court of Texas has the constitutional and statutory responsibility within
the State for the lawyer discipline and disability system, and has inherent power to
maintain appropriate standards of professional conduct and to dispose of individual
cases of lawyer discipline. See also State Bar of Tex. v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243,
245 (Tex. 1994). Any attorney admitted to practice law in Texas is subject to the
disciplinary jurisdiction of the Court and the Commission for Lawyer Discipline
for the State Bar of Texas. TEX. GOVT CODE 81.071.
An attorney is entitled to due course of law and due process before being
disciplined
To insure that an attorneys due course of law and due process rights are
met, the Texas Supreme Court has set has established minimum standards and
procedures for processing grievances against attorneys and imposing sanctions for
15
professional misconduct. TEX. GOVT CODE 81.072. Disciplinary proceedings

are initiated by referral to the Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the State Bar of Texas.
TEX. GOVT Code 81.072(c); see generally In re State Bar, 113 S.W.3d 730 (Tex.
2003); In re Caballero, 441 S.W.3d 562 (Tex. App.El Paso 2014, no pet.); Mills
v. Ghilain, 68 S.W.3d 141 (Tex. App.Corpus Christi, 2001, no pet.).
If the CCA believed that Dows ability to practice law should be curtailed, it
could and should have followed these procedures and initiated grievance
proceedings, yet it did not. No prosecutor was appointed to handle the contempt
proceedings against Dow. The lack of an independent prosecutor left the CCA in
the position of prosecutor, witness and judge. In a case where a prosecutor also
represents an interested party, there is an intolerable danger that the public interest
will be compromised, and produces at least the appearance of impropriety. Young
v. U.S. ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, 481 U.S. 787 (1987).
By disciplining Dow outside the scope of its power and without referring the
disciplinary matter to the appropriate court, the CCA has deprived Dow of his
constitutional rights under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution is applicable in contempt
proceedings. Dunn v. United States, 442 U.S. 100 (1979);
Although counsel does not believe his conduct warrants suspension,
imposing that sanction is within the authority of the Disciplinary Counsel and the
16
State Bar because this Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over matters
pertaining to attorney discipline, delegated that authority to BODA. Sanctioning
Dow by suspending him from practicing before the court was not within the
unilateral power of this Court of Criminal Appeals. Thus, the CCA usurped the
Texas Supreme Courts authority by suspending Dow from the practice of law.
B. Dows Conduct Did Not Rise to the Level that Permitted the CCA to
Suspend Him for Any Alleged Contemptuous Conduct.
The CCA, like all other Texas courts, has broad authority to punish attorneys
for contempt. TEX. GOVT CODE 21.002(a). And, the CCA did find Dow to be in
contempt. See Exhibit A. However, this authority is not unbridled, and in this case
the CCAs decision to suspend Dow for contempt was improper.
As a threshold issue, due process applies to contempt proceedings. Id Dunn
Yet, the evidence conclusively shows that the CCA did not properly afford Dow
due process. Dow never had a hearing before an appropriate court, the judges
accusing him of misconduct acted as prosecutor and judge, and the contempt
punishment meted out was not a permitted contempt punishment.
There is no question that Dow was punished for contempt by a court that he
has offended. Texas law states in these circumstances, a lawyer has a right to
request that the contempt proceedings be adjudicated by a judge other than the one
who claims to be offended. TEX. GOVT CODE 21.002(d)(2004).
17
In what
amounted to contempt proceedings, Dow had the right to an impartial prosecutor

and judge in a proper hearing before the proper court, and he was deprived of this
right.
In addition, the facts to do not support the CCAs finding of contempt or
suspension as punishment for such contempt. The Texas Government Code states
clearly that [a]n attorney may not be suspended or stricken from the rolls for
contempt unless the contempt involves fraudulent or dishonorable conduct or
malpractice. TEX. GOVT CODE 82.061. The CCA did not make any fact
findings about the nature of Dows conduct, much less conclude that it was
fraudulent or dishonorable or malpractice. See Exhibits P and A Nor is there any
evidence in the record to support such a finding.
There is no question that Dow is a respected and effective advocated against
the death penalty.
He has appeared numerous times before the CCA and as
mentioned, his criticism of its work has not always been kind. Yet, the ability to
proffer and advocate differing opinions and for change is the essence of our
judicial system. Lawyers are not only permitted to zealously and passionately
represent their clients, but this is what the Bar strives towards.
The fact that a
court may find certain methods distasteful is of no consequence. Rather, only

when an advocate crosses the line and acts fraudulently, dishonestly, or commits
malpractice can he be punished for his actions. As detailed above, Dows conduct
18
did not reach such a threshold.
After receiving a letter from an inmate facing
execution and requesting assistance, Dow diligently investigated the case and
prepared filings on his behalf. Exhibits I, K and L Nothing indicates that Dows
actions were fraudulent or dishonorable. To the contrary, Dows pro bono services
provide a needed and honorable service. In seeking to defend a client who was
about to be executed, he acted in accordance with the highest ethical, moral and
professional duties of the legal profession. Accordingly, there was no basis for
suspending Dow as punishment for contempt.
C. The Power to Sanction Dow Did Not Give the CCA the Ability to
Suspend Him From Practicing Law.
Courts also maintain the inherent power to discipline an attorneys
behavior. In re Bennett, 960 S.W.2d 35, 40 (Tex. 1997) (citing Eichelberger, 582
S.W.2d at 398-99); Brager v. State, No. 0365-03, 2004 WL 3093237, at *2-3 (Tex.
Crim. App. Oct. 13, 2004) (not designated for publication). This includes the
power to sanction attorneys for abuse of the judicial process, or for interfering with
the court's core functions. See Bennett, 960 S.W.2d at 40; Brager, 2004 WL
3093237 at *2 (citing Kutch v. Del Mar College, 831 S.W.2d 506, 510 (Tex.
App.Corpus Christi 1992, no writ)).
The CCAs core functions include deciding issues of fact raised by the
pleadings, deciding decisions of law, entering a final judgment on the facts and the
19
law and executing a final judgment. Armadillo Bail Bonds v. State, 802 S.W.2d
237, 239-40 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). As noted by Justice Alcala, Dows actions in
filing pleadings on behalf of Paredes seven days before his scheduled execution
did not interfere with these core functions.
Counsel filed all the pleadings they filed on behalf of Paredes by 6:30 p.m.
on October 21 (167.5 hours before Paredes was scheduled to be executed)
(6.97917 x 24 hour days). The CCA handed down its rulings denying relief on all
of the pleadings filed by counsel on behalf of Paredes 39.5 hours after the final
pleading was filed. Counsels actions in filing on October 21 did not interfere with
the CCAs ability to carry out its core functions. Justice Alcala noted that:
Here, Dow filed his pleadings seven days prior to the scheduled
execution date, on October 21. Two days later, this Court ruled on the
matters raised in the pleadings, and the defendant was executed on
schedule on October 28. The fact that this Court ruled quickly
suggests that the matters presented in Dows pleadings were not so
overly complicated that the delay impacted the defendants rights or
prevented this Court from giving full consideration to those matters.)
See Exhibit C at 6.
Even if a claim could be made that Dows actions had interfered with the
CCAs core functions, the CCA, in suspending Dow, acted without authority.
First, counsel have not been able located any cases where a court acting
unilaterally has suspended a member of the Texas Bar from practicing before it as
a sanction.
20
And second, suspension was more severe than necessary to satisfy its
legitimate purpose. See TransAmerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Powell, 811 S.W.2d
913, 917 (Tex. 1991); see also Brager, 2004 WL 3093237, at *3 (recognizing
sanctions only available to the extent that no lesser sanction was available to
preserve judicial integrity and prevent significant interference with core judicial
functions). Suspending a lawyer for a filing, which would be considered late by
less than a day under even the CCAs interpretation of the deadlines, is beyond
excessive for the conduct, especially where the filing itself dealt with life and death
issues.
The CCA noted in its order announcing Dows suspension, that Dow was
before the Court in 2010 after failing to timely file pleadings on behalf of Danielle
Simpson. See Exhibit A at 3. At that time, the Court took no action against Dow.
Id. This alleged failure over four years ago hardly makes the case for a repeat
pattern of abuse though. Since 2010, Dow has timely filed pleadings in the CCA
on behalf of at least five inmates facing execution. See Ex parte Garza, No. WR70,257-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 18, 2013); Ex parte Parr, No. WR-65,443-02
(May 3, 2013); Ex parte Cobb, No. WR-68,192-03 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 19,
2013); Ex parte Thurmond, Nos. WR-62,425-01, -02 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb. 29,
21
2012); Ex parte Adams, No. WR-65,598-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb. 18, 2011).18
Because the suspension was more severe a sanction than necessary to satisfy
its purpose and is not an allowable even in a legitimate contempt action in these
circumstances the CCA did not have the authority to suspend Dow, even if it
determined that some sanction was warranted.
PRAYER
Relator/Petitioner David Dow request that the Court grant the petition for
declaratory judgment, or in the alternative the petition for writ of mandamus, and
hold that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals exceeded its authority is in issuing
an order suspending David Dow from practice before the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals for one year, except with leave of court, and further order the CCA to
vacate the offending order. Dow requests all other relief to which he may be
entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Nicole DeBorde
Nicole DeBorde
TBN: 00787344
18
On behalf of only one client since 2010 has the timing of Dows filings been such that a
statement pursuant to the CCAs Rule 11-003 was required, and as Dow explained in that case,
the late filing was caused by the fact that the trial courts order which was appealed to the CCA
was not itself issued until less than a week before the execution. The CCA accepted his
proceeding and ruled as if timely filed without complaint.
22

Office: 713-526-6300
Fax: 713-228-0034
And
Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 52.3(j), I certify that I
have reviewed the petition and concluded that every factual statement in the
petition is supported by competent evidence included in the appendix or pleadings
filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals.
/s/ Nicole DeBorde
Nicole DeBorde
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that a true and correct copy of Petitioner/Relators Petition for
Declaratory Judgment, or in the Alternative Writ of Mandamus has been served
pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5 on on Sian Schilhab, General
Counsel of the Court of Criminal Appeals via an email to
Sian.Schilhab@txcourts.gov.
/s/ Nicole DeBorde
Nicole DeBorde
23
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
This is to certify that the Petition for Declaratory Judgment, or in the
Alternative, Writ of Mandamus is 3496 words in accordance with Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 9.4(i)(2)(D).
The following attorneys declare:

I have read this motion and join in its filing.
/s/ Nicole DeBorde

Nicole DeBorde
George McCall Mac Secrest

Bennett & Secrest, PLLC
State Bar Number 17973900
808 Travis Street, Suite 2400
713-757-0679
713-650-1602 fax
Email: gmsecrest@aol.com
KENT A. SCHAFFER
TBA No. 17724300
JPMorganChase Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: kentschaffer@gmail.com
Past President TCDLA
Dick Deguerin
DeGUERIN, DICKSON, HENNESSY & WARD
State Bar No. 05638000
1018 Preston, 7th Floor
(713) 223-5959 Telephone
(713) 223-9231 Facsimile
Email: ddeguerin@aol.com
24
DeGUERIN, DICKSON, HENNESSY & WARD

/s/Matt Hennessy
Matt Hennessy
matt@deguerin.com
1018 Preston, 7th Floor
(713) 223-5959 Telephone
(713) 223-9231 Facsimile
Kevin Dubose
1844 Harvard Street
Marcy Hogan Greer
515 Congress Ave., Suite 2350
Austin, Texas 78701
TRICHTER & MURPHY, P.C.
By:
_____________________________
DOUG MURPHY
SBN 24013215
The Kirby Mansion
2000 Smith Street
Tel: (713) 524-1010
Lydia Clay Jackson
Law Office of L. Clay-Jackson, PLLC
504 W. Lewis
Conroe, Texas 77301
Past President TCDLA
25
/S/ Edward A. Mallett

EDWARD A. MALLETT
Mallett | Saper | Berg, L.L.P.
SBN: 12863000
4306 Yoakum Blvd., Suite 400
Tel: (713) 236-1900
Fax: (713) 228-0321
____________________________________
DAVID R. BIRES
TBA No. 02335000
JP Morgan Bank Building
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: David@BSDLawFirm.com
Past TCDLA President
CHRISTOPHER L. TRITICO
Tritico Rainey PLLC
1212 Durham Drive
(713) 581-3399
(713) 581-3360 (Facsimile)
____________________________
Randy Schaffer
1301 McKinney, Suite 3100
(713) 951-9555
(713) 951-9854 (facsimile)
noguilt@swbell.net
26
__________________________________
Carmen Roe
SBN: 24048773
President of Harris County Criminal
Lawyers Association (HCCLA)
Chip B. Lewis
1207 S. Shepherd
713-523-7878
713-523-7887 Fax www.chiplewislaw.com
chipblewis@aol.com
Alicia Devoy ONeill
1207 S. Shepherd
713-523-7878
713-523-7887 Fax
www.chiplewislaw.com
alicia@chiplewislaw.com
DON DAVIDSON
State Bar Number
Attorney-at-Law
803 Forest Ridge Drive, Suite 203
Bedford, TX 76022-7258
Phone number: 817-571-4940
Fax number: 817-571-4940
Mobile: (817) 343-8042
Email: donatty@flash.net
SARAH ROLAND
STATE BAR NO. 24049077
27
1409 NORTH ELM STREET

DENTON, TEXAS 76201
TEL: (940) 323-9305
FAX: (940) 312-6830
EMAIL: sarah@sarahroland.com
J. Michael Jaynes
4324 N. Beltline Road, Suite C111
Irving, Texas 75038-3594
972-570-7733
972-570-9094 fax
jmj@jayneslaw.com
/s/ Tim Evans
TIM EVANS
SBN 06724000
115 W. 2nd St., Suite 202
Fort Worth, TX 76102
(817)332-3822 Phone
(817)332-2763 Fax
LAW OFFICE OF STAN SCHWIEGER
/S/ Stan Schwieger
Stan Schwieger
600 Austin Avenue, Suite 12
P.O. Box 975
Waco, Texas 767030975
(254) 7525678
(254) 7527792Facsimile
Email: wacocrimatty@yahoo.com
28
Ali Fazel
Scardino & Fazel
State Bar Number
Attorneys at Law
SBN: 24012611
Sweeney, Coombs & Fredericks Bldg.
1004 Congress St., 3rd Floor
Tel: 713-229-9292
Fax: 713-229-9931
Robert Scardino
Scardino & Fazel
Attorneys at Law
Tel: 713-229-9292
Fax: 713-229-9931
Yalila Guerrero
Bar 00788862
Guerrero Law Group, L.L.C.
440 Louisiana St Ste 1550
Houston, TX 77002
Office: 713-862-7997
lee@gblawgroup.com
Anthony Scardino
Scardino & Fazel
Attorneys at Law
29
Tel: 713-229-9292
Fax: 713-229-9931
Jonathan Landers
2817 W T.C. Jester
Houston Texas 77018
(713) 301-3153 (work)
(713) 685-5020 (FAX)
jonathan.landers@gmail.com
Josh Schaffer
SB 24037439
1301 McKinney, Suite 3100
(713) 951-9555
(713) 951-9854 (fax)
josh@joshschafferlaw.com
www.schafferfirm.com
Maurie Levin
Texas Bar No. 00789452
Robert J. Fickman
Attorney at Law
1229 Heights Boulevard
(713) 655-7400 (o)
(713) 224-5533 (f)
www.fickmanlaw.com
/s/ Randall L. Kallinen
Randall L. Kallinen
Former President, Houston ACLU
30
Former board member, Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

Chair of Police Accountability Task Force, National Lawyers Guild-Texoma
Region
Law Office of Randall L Kallinen PLLC
511 Broadway Street
Telephone: 713/320-3785
FAX: 713/893-6737
E-mail: AttorneyKallinen@aol.com
/s/ Terence A. Russell
Terence A. "Tiger" Russell
Bar No. 17437070
PO Box 306
Hillsboro, Texas 76645
254-580-9282
254-582-5593 (fax)
/s/ Deandra M. Grant
Deandra M. Grant
TBN# 00787578
800 E. Campbell Rd., Ste. 110
Richardson, TX 75081
Ofc (972) 943-8500
Fax (972) 432-7547
TexasDWIGal@gmail.com
Clinical Professor Robert C. Owen
Bluhm Legal Clinic
Northwestern University School of Law
375 East Chicago Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611
312.503.0135 voice
312.503.8977 facsimile
robert.owen@law.northwestern.edu
31
/s/ Franklin Bynum

Franklin Bynum
Texas Bar Number 24069451
Bynum Law Office
501 North Interstate 35
Austin, Texas 78702
fgb@lawfgb.com
(512) 887-3938
Jim Marcus
Capital Punishment Clinic
Bar Number 00787963
University of Texas School of Law
727 E. Dean Keeton Street
Austin, Texas 78705
(512) 232-1475 Tel
(512) 471-3489 Fax
jmarcus@law.utexas.edu
Steven J. Lieberman
Attorney at Law
712 Main St., Suite 2400
(713) 228-8500
(713) 228-0034 (Fax)
Slieber699@aol.com
Gemayel Haynes
SBN 24059918
723 Main St. #1020
Phone 713.256.1993
Fax 713.456.2322
32
Jordan M. Steiker
University of Texas Law School
727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, Texas 78705
Tel. 512-232-1346
Fax 512-471-6988
Email: JSteiker@law.utexas.edu
Mekisha Jane Walker
Attorney at Law
1714 Sunset Blvd.
713.228.2611Office
888.307.1772Fax
walker@walkerlawhouston.com
www.walkerlawhouston.com
Alexander Bunin
501 Gale Street
Houston, TX 77009
713-301-0381
alex.bunin@pdo.hctx.net
Clausell Parrish, PLLC.
Damon Parrish II, Attorney
3033 Chimney Rock, Suite 205
Houston, TX 77056
O: 713-228-2255
F: 713-228-2265
Damon.Parrish@ClausellParrish.com
33
Raoul Schonemann
Texas Bar No. 00786233.
Capital Punishment Clinic
University of Texas School of Law
727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
(512) 232-9391 office
(512) 471-3489 fax
rschonemann@law.utexas.edu
Sharon Curtis
Board Certified in Criminal Law
Bar No. 05286700
Law Office of Sharon Curtis, LLC
1216 N. Central Expy. Suite 205
McKinney, Texas 75070
214-726-1881, 214-269-5942-fax
scurtis@sharoncurtislaw.com
/s/ Jennifer R. Gaut
Jennifer R. Gaut
SBN: 24068765
River Oaks Tower
3730 Kirby Dr., Ste. 1120
Off: (713) 520 5223
Fax: (888) 680 6837
Email: Jennifergaut@gmail.com
34
/s/Gene P. Tausk_______
TBN: 24003035
1221 Studewood
Houston, TX 77008
(713) 429-5476
(713) 490-3150 (fax)
gene@tauskvega.com
JAVIER O. MARTINEZ
TBA No. 24082538
JPMorganChase Bank Building
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: Javier@bsdlawfirm.com
Sandra Oballe
Law Office of Sandra J. Oballe
1216 N. Velasco, Suite H
Angleton, Texas 77515
713.524.6656
Soballe2@yahoo.com
Daniel De La Garza
Law Office of Daniel De La Garza
115 E. Travis St., Ste. 1542
San Antonio, Texas 78205
210-222-1888 Office
210-579-9304 Fax
daniel.delagarza@me.com
35
/s/ Nicolas Hughes

NICOLAS HUGHES
Attorney at Law
1414 Cleveland St., Unit A
Houston Texas 77019
(713) 256-3212
TBA No. 24059981
nicolas.hughes.law@gmail.com
W. Troy McKinney
Schneider & McKinney, P.C.State Bar Number 13725020
713-951-9994
713-224-6008 (fax)
http://www.texascriminaldefenselawyers.com
http://www.houstondwiattorneys.com/
wtmhousto2@aol.com
JAMES M. KENNEDY
TBA No. 24008754
JPMorgan Chase Building
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: JamesKennedy@BSDLawFirm.com
TAMMY BUTLER KIDD
TBA No. 24012960
JPMorgan Chase Bank Building
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: Tammy@BSDLawFirm.com
36
Gary Tabakman
Law Office of Gary Tabakman, PLLC
TBA No. 24076065
713-228-8500 | Fax: 713-228-0034
http://www.bsdlawfirm.com
http://www.tabakmanlawfirm.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/garytabakman
Kathryn M. Kase
Lee Kovarsky
Naomi Terr
Katherine C. Black
Burke M. Butler
Elizabeth Hoefer
Bar No. 24092527
TEXAS DEFENDER SERVICE
1927 Blodgett
Tel. 713-222-7788
Fax 713-222-0260
Email: KMKase@texasdefender.org
LKovarsky@texasdefender.org
NTerr@texasdefender.org
KateBlack@texasdefender.org
BButler@texasdefender.org
EHoefer@texasdefender.org
Benjamin B. Wolff
Alma Lagarda
510 South Congress
37
Suite 304
Austin, Texas 78704
Tel. 512-320-8300
Fax 512-477-2153
Email: BWolff@texasdefender.org
ALagarda@texasdefender.org
Paul E. Mansur
P.O. Box 1300
Denver City, Texas 79323
Tel. 806-215-1025
Fax 806-592-9136
Email: PMansur@texasdefender.org
Mandy Welch
Burr & Welch PC
Leggett, Texas 77350
Mandy Welch
/s/ David A. Schulman
_______________________________
David A. Schulman
Attorney at Law
SBN 17833400
Post Office Box 783
Austin, Texas 78767
zdrdavida@davidschulman.com
Tel. 512-474-4747
Fax: 512-532-6282
/s/ Curtis Barton
Curtis Barton
1201 Franklin St., Fl. 13
38

Phone: 713-368-0016
Lori A. Botello
Attorney & Counselor at Law
9219 Katy Freeway, Suite 246
TBN: 24055201
Tel: 713.202.9403
Fax: 713.467.6650
/s/ Larry Sauer
State bar No. 17674000
Jolanda Jones
Law Offices of Jolanda Jones
TBN: 00794725
PO Box 8312
David O'Neil
Habern, O'Neil & Associates
SBN 15284700
Cynthia Eva Hujar Orr
29th Floor Tower Life Building
210-226-1463
Best Lawyers in America in White Collar Crime
Wendell Odom
440 Louisiana, suite 200,
Houston, TX 77002
39
Steven H. Halpert
Juvenile Division Chief
Harris County Public Defenders Office
1201 Franklin Street, 13th Floor
Tel: 713-368-0016
Fax: 713-437-4005
Keith S. Hampton
Attorney at Law
1103 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701
512-476-8484 (office)
512-477-3580 (fax)
512-762-6170 (cell)
Board Certified in Criminal Law and Criminal Appellate Law
by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
/s/ Mark Hochglaube
_____________________
Mark Hochglaube
TBN 24005427
1201 Franklin
Attorney at Law
Jim Darnell, P.C.
310 N. Mesa St., Ste. 212
El Paso, Texas 79901
Phone (915) 532-2442
Fax (915) 532-4549
jdarnell@jdarnell.com
40
Stan Brown
P.O. Box 3122
Abilene, TX 79604
325-677-1851
fax 677-3107
cell 725-8882
mstrb@aol.com
Ceola McDonald
The Law Office of Ceola McDonald
"For All Your Legal Needs"
19506 HWY 59 North, Suite 305
Humble, Tx. 77338
281-674-4876 office
310 601-1853 fax
James Fletcher
Criminal Defense Attorney
Bar Number 24077619
Tyler Flood & Associates
1229 Heights Blvd.
Houston, TX 77008
713.224.5529 office
713.224.5533 fax
james@tylerflood.com
s/____________________
Carl R Pruett
Sbot 16364800
202 Travis, Ste 50
713-228-6050
Fax 713-224-1214
41
/s/ Nancy Byrd Bunin

sbot 03561500
Habern, O'Neil & Associates
P.O. Box 8930
Huntsville, Tx 77340
(936)435-1380
(936)435-1089 fax
Nbunin@paroletexas.com
Vik Vij
The Law Office of Vikram Vij,
PLLC
832-762-1409 Office
281-371-6533 Fax
713-452-0255 Cell
Vivian R King
00784399
2202 Alabama St
Houston, TX. 77004
(713) 222-2019 Office
(877) 753-6706 eFax
/s/ *THEODORE S. HARGROVE, III*
Attorney at Law
TCDLA District 2 Director
San Angelo
/S/ Hiram McBeth
Hiram McBeth
TBN: 13329500
6060 North Central Expressway, Set 560
Dallas, Texas 75206
42
Samuel E. Bassett
Minton, Burton, Bassett & Collins, P.C.
1100 Guadalupe
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 472-0144
sbassett@mbfc.com
SBN 01894100
Frank Sellers
Hurley, Guinn & Sellers
1805 13th Street
Lubbock, Texas 79401
806.771.0700 tel
806.763.8199 fax
frank@hurleyguinn.com
SCHEINER LAW GROUP, P.C.
By: /s/ GRANT M. SCHEINER
2211 Norfolk St., Suite 735
Houston, Texas 77098-4062
Tel: 713-783-8998
Fax: 1-866-798-9854
TBN: 00784913
_/s/_____________________
STEPHANIE K. PATTEN
2101 Moneda St.
Ft. Worth, TX 76117
817.348.0925
Fax 817.338.9525
David Hurley
Hurley, Guinn & Sellers
State Bar Number 10310200.
43
1805 13th Street

(806)771.0700
(806) 763.8199 fax
s/Ronald L. Goranson
RONALD L. GORANSON
2828 Routh Street, Suite 675
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 651.1122 / (214) 871-0420 (fax)
Scott Markowitz
SBOT# 00784527
5610 Southwest Fwy, Ste 104
Houston, TX 77057
713-521-7568 telephone
713-521-0223 fax
www.highwaylawyers.com
Law Offices of Jesko & Steadman
612 Earl Garrett
Kerrville, Texas 78028
Tel.: (830) 257-5005
Fax: (830) 896-1563
/s/ Clay B. Steadman
By: _________________________
Clay B. Steadman
State Bar No.: 0785038
Email: jesksted@ktc.com
Jeremy Rosenthal, Esq.
Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
State Bar No. is 24029807
Rosenthal & Wadas, PLLC
4500 Eldorado Parkway, Suite 3000
McKinney, TX 75070
(972) 369-0577
(972) 369-0532 (fax)
44
The Sharkey Law Office

__Christopher Sharkey_____
Christopher Sharkey
SBOT: 18114150
7807 Long Point Road
Suite 435
(713) 683-1007
(713) 683-1067
sharkeylaw@sbcglobal.net
/s/ John P. Denholm
JOHN P. DENHOLM
SDTX Admission No. 933213
397 N. Sam Houston Pkwy E., Suite 325
Tel: 832-448-1148
Fax: 832-448-1147
john@musicklawoffice.com
/s/ JoAnne Musick
JoAnne Musick
Attorney for Defendant
Texas State Bar No. 24000371
Federal Admission No. 36104
397 N Sam Houston Pkwy E, Suite 325
Phone
832-448-1148
Fax 832-448-1147
Matthew J. Kita
P.O. Box 5119
Dallas, Texas 75208
214.699.1863 (phone) / 214.347.7221 (fax)
matt@mattkita.com
45
Danny Easterling
Past President of Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
Bar # 06362100
1018 Preston Sixth Floor
713-228-4441
Fax 713-228-4072
eaepc@swbell.net
Justin C. Harris
24078634
1229 Heights Blvd
713-224-5529
713-224-5533 fax
Justin@TylerFlood.com
Chris Raesz, P.C.
306 North Carroll Blvd
Denton TX 76201
940-380-9505
940-382-2065 fax
Linda Icenhauer-Ramirez
SBN# 10382944
Attorney at Law
1103 Nueces
Austin, Texas 78701
512-477-7991
512-477-3580
ljir@aol.com
Robert Pelton
bar 15733500
4001 north shepherd, suite 110
Houston ,Texas 77018 713 524 8471
rpeltonlawyer1@aol.com
46
Carole J. Powell
Carole J. Powell
Deputy Public Defender
6400 Delta - Juvenile Probation Department
El Paso, TX 79905
Phone 915-849-2014
Fax 915-849-2537
Wes Ball
Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist
Ball & Hase, P.C., Attorneys at Law
4025 Woodland Park Blvd., Suite 100
Arlington, Texas 76013
Tel.: (817) 860-5000
Fax: (817) 860-6645
Email: wes@ballhase.com
Wayne A. Fowler
24069044
9500 Ray White Rd, Ste 200
Keller, TX 76244
(817) 609-4050
(817) 350-6346
waynefowlerlaw@gmail.com
MARIA I. HERNANDEZ
SBN 24000321
2110 East Yandell Drive
El Paso, Texas 79903
Ph. (915) 838-0338
Facsimile (915) 808-6869
Roberto Balli
Board Certified in Criminal Lawby Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Balli Law Office
P.O. Box 1058
Laredo, TX 78042
Tel (956) 712-4999
Fax (956) 724-5830
47
/s/ Vic Sasso

Bar# 17653200
Turley Law Center
6440 North Central Expressway
Suite 309
Dallas, Texas 75206
Phone (214) 265-5547
Fax (214) 919-7248
vicsasso@earthlink.net
George E. Renneberg
Bar# 16778600
417 Nugent Street, Conroe, TX 77301
Phone 936-756-8181
Fax 936-756-8112
Email lawhall@consolidated.net
Rick Oliver
TBN: 24048179
1221 Studewood Street
Houston, TX 77008
Phone: (713) 864-3700
Fax: (713) 864-3703
Email: rickoliverlaw@gmail.com
Don Flanary
Goldstein Goldstein and Hilley
310 South St. Mary's Street, Suite 2900
210-226-1463
210-789-3181 cell
210-226-8367 fax
Joseph Hoelscher, II
SBN 24042972
48
The Hoelscher Law Office

115 E. Travis, Suite 1500
San Antonio, TX 78205
210-222-9132
210-223-7455 (Fax)
Joe@HoelscherLawOffice.com
Paul Holt Walcutt
SBN 24049855
600 W. 13th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 322-9756 Phone
(512) 451-5882 Fax
paul@idefendaustin.com
Christopher L King
TXBN 24088864
100 N 6th St, Suite 902
Waco, TX 76701
(2540 717-8600
(2540 754-4824
CallahanKingLaw@gmail.com
Drew Willey
Bar#: 24093371
1215 Marconi St., Unit C, Houston, TX 77019
Phone: 713-739-9455
Fax: 713-510-1950
Email: drew@Law-DW.com
Bob Mabry Attorney at Law PLLC
304 North Main Street #6
Conroe Texas 77301-3002
(936) 228-7796
Fax 1-866-394-3113
mabry.bob@gmail.com
Texas Bar Association 12750980
49
Mark R. Thiessen
Attorney At Law
Bar Number 24042025
1221 Studewood Street
Office: 713-864-9000
Fax: 713-964-9006
Email: mark@thetexastrialattorney.com
www.thetexastrialattorney.com
James Huggler
State Bar 00795437
100 E. Ferguson, Suite 805
Tyler, Texas 75702
903-593-2400
903-593-3830 fax
jhugglerlaw@sbcglobal.net
Daniel L. McBride
Bar# 13331600
6636 Spoonwood Lane
Fort Worth, TX 76137
Phone 817-917-8847
Kurt Hopke
Bar# 24039931
8303 Southwest Fwy, Ste 545
Phone 832-457-8702
Fax 832-413-5785
email kurthopke@gmail.com
Robert Blankenship
SBN 00792961
5128 Birchman Ave.
Fort Worth TX 76107
817.332.2202
Robert@davidwynnelaw.com
50
LAW OFFICE OF J. PAUL NELSON

P. O. Box 934
207 N. Main St.
Henderson, TX 75653
Tel. (903) 657-1424
Fax. (903) 657-6220
By: /S/ J. Paul Nelson
J. Paul Nelson
Email: nelsonlaw@suddenlinkmail.com
Dan Cogdell
SBOT 04501500
402 Main, 4th Floor
Houston, Tx. 77002
713 426 2244 (Main)
713 426 2255 (Fax)
dan@cogdell-law.com
Don L Wilson
State Bar number 21677500
334 Chestnut
Abilene, Texas 79602
325-673-8124
325-673-9368 (fax)
dwut71@aol.com
Jed Silverman
Law Offices of Jed Silverman
1221 Studewood
Houston ,Texas 77008
713 226 8800
fax 713 222 7424
WWW.JEDSILVERMAN.COM
sb 24013511
51
Virginia Marie Raymond

16617300
1006 East Csar Chvez Street
Austin, Texas 78702
Office phone: 512.472.6270
Cello phone: 512.748.0940
Fax: 512.472.8263
virginiaraymond@austin.rr.com
Ral A. Cez
Law Office of Ral A. Cez
301 College Avenue
Fort Worth, Texas 76104
Phone: 817-886-0651
Fax: 817-886-0689
Email: Raul.Canez@CanezLaw.com
Virginia Carter
Attorney At Law
300 Burnett, Ste 130
817-877-5151
Catherine Clare Bernhard
Bar No. 02216575
P.O. Box 2817
Red Oak, Texas 75154
972-617-5548
fax-972-671-5547
cbernhard@sbcglobal.net
Cynthia Henley
Bar# 17409100
7626 E. Jordan Cove, Houston, TX 77055
Phone 713-222-1220
Fax none
Email: cynthiahenley@yahoo.com
52
David Patrick Callahan

Bar# 24037999
2216 Walter Smith Court, Azle, Texas 76020
Phone: (817) 905-5322
Fax: (817) 237-5532
Email: llbcazle@aol.com
R. Walton Weaver
Board Certified Criminal Law
Board Certified Criminal Appellate Law
HERRMANN & WEAVER
Attorneys at Law
320 S. Polk, Ste. 902
Amarillo, TX 79101
806-372-9258
806-372-8444
F. Clinton Broden
Bar# 24001495
2600 State Street, Dallas, Texas 75204
Phone 214-720-9552
Fax 214-720-9594
Jeffrey Hill
PO Box 763
Bushland, TX 79012
tel: 806-437-1302
fax: 806-437-1307
JeffreyHillLaw@yahoo.com
Alex G. Azzo
Bar# : 01475500
P.O. Box 801231, Houston, TX 77280
Phone: (713) 822-6915
email: azzoazzo@aol.com
53
Mario Del Prado

222 E. Main Plaza
05653600
(210) 698-3533 Telephone
(210) 698-3701 Fax
www.delpradolaw.com
mario@delpradolaw.com
Board Certified - Criminal Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Board Certified Criminal Trial National Board of Trial Advocacy
Bud
John "Bud" Ritenour
Attorney at Law
Board Certified - Criminal Law
The Ritenour Law Firm, PC
115 E. Travis St., Suite 1716
Ph:(210) 222-0125
Fax: (210) 222-2467
RitenourLaw@aol.com
Bobby D. Mims
Bar# 12172200
216 W. Erwin Street, Suite 300A
Tyler, Texas 75702
903-595-2160
Fax 903-596-0719
email bobbymims@gmail.com
Mary Heafner
Bar No. 09325500
5110 Mimosa
Bellaire, Texas 77401
(713) 269 0467
54
Mary77401@gmail.com
Patti Sedita
Attorney at Law
One Sugar Creek Center Blvd, Suite 1045
Sugar Land, TX 77478
Pfsedita@gmail.com
(O) 281.313.4225
(F) 866.827.2087
SBOT # 00787484
Board Certified- Texas Board of Legal Specialization Criminal Trial Law
/S/ Bob Garcia Jr
Attorney at Law
SBN 07645200
413 N Texas Ave
Odessa, Texas 79761
Tel: 432-332-6756
Fax: 432-332-6759
BGarciaLaw@ aol.com
Dustin R. Galmor
Galmor, Stovall & Gilthorpe
SBOT: 24057525
485 Milam Street
Beaumont, Texas 77701
409-832-7757
888-248-9161 fax
Susan Schoon
Bar# 24046803
200 N. Seguin Avenue
New Braunfels, TX 78130
Phone 830-627-0044 Fax 830-620-5657
Email sschoon@zslawoffice.com
John Grant Jones
Bar# 10917000
208 Pipe Creek Lane
55
Georgetown, Texas 78633

Phone: 361-815-2470
Fax: 1-866-243-9810
email: grant800@att.net
MORGAN A. BOURQUE
SBN 24062627
24 Waterway Avenue, Suite 660
The Woodlands, Texas 77380
Telephone: (713) 862-7766
Facsimile: (832) 813-0321
Email: morgan@morganbourque.com
T. Brent Mayr
SBN 24037052
4101 Washington Ave, 2nd Floor
Houston, TX 77007
713-808-9613
713-808-9991 fax
bmayr@bmayrlaw.com
Anthony S. Haughton, Esq.,
Haughton & Associates
3013 Fountain View, Suite 145
Houston, TX 77057
(713) 782-6060
(713) 953-7482
Ashaughton@aol.com
Ralph Dowden
24040828
1108 North Locust Street
Denton, Texas 76201
(214) 436-5194
texlawman9@gmail.com
/s/ Thomas H. Burton, III
Thomas H. Burton, III
56
Attorney at Law
SBOT No. 24009927
Cell (713) 933-5323
Tel. (713) 741-9301
Fax (713) 741-9302
David Suhler
Attorney at Law
P. O. Box 540744
Houston TX 77254-0744
(713) 983-8818
/s/ Heather E. Hoblit
Heather E. Hoblit
The Hoblit Law Firm
SBN: 24069930
318 N. Main St.
Conroe, Texas 77301
(936) 828-1118
(936)-205-1417 (fax)
h.e.hoblit@hoblitlaw.com
Mackenzie "Mack" Schaffer
Attorney at Law
1301 McKinney St., Suite 3100
p: (713) 951-9555
f: (713) 951-9854
William Savoie
SBOT 24054558
One Financial Plaza 450
57
Huntsville Texas 77340

p 9364351380
f 9364351089
Jose R. Villanueva
Law Office of Jos R. Villanueva
Bar Number 00794794
PO Box 570
Waco, Texas 76703
(254) 230-2710
(866)821-1162
Jose.R.Villanueva1@Gmail.Com
CANDELARIO ELIZONDO
Bar # 06521500
1018 Preston #200 Houston , Texas 77002. # 06521500
elizondo12@aol.com
/s/ Joseph A. Connors III
Joseph A. Connors III
Attorney At Law
P. O. Box 5838
McAllen, Texas 78502-5838
956-687-8218office
956-687-8230fax
connors@innocent.com
Betty Blackwell
Bar Card #12779300
1306 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701
512-479-0149
512-320-8743
Email: bettyblackwell@bettyblackwell.com
58
Steven Denny
SBN:24005798
2414 Line Ave, Amarillo, TX 79106
806-379-2010
806-379-2012
lawyerdenny@aol.com
William E. Harrison
State Bar #00789780
Harrison & Dietrich, PLLC
215 Simonton
Conroe, Texas 77301
(936) 828-3898 (Telephone)
(936) 828-3965 (Facsimile)
conroeattorney@yahoo.com
/s/ Frank Chelly
FRANK D. CHELLY
State Bar Number: 24071257
The Law Office of Frank Chelly, PLLC
308 N. Main
Conroe, Texas 77301
936-701-1150
936-647-2592 (Fax)
Frank@chellylaw.com
JAMES EDD WOOLDRIDGE
SB# 24010492
Chase Tower
600 S. Tyler Street
Suite 1704 LB 12051
Amarillo, Texas 79101
Tel. (806) 418 8575
Fax (806) 418 8576
59
Barney Sawyer
SBN 17693200
40 N.E. 8th Street
Paris, Texas 75460
Ph. 903-784-0816
Fax 903-784-0834
Email: bpsawyer@classicnet.net
Dustin E. Nimz
Attorney at Law
900 8th Street Suite 1030
Wichita Falls, TX 76301
tel: (940) 766-5335
fax: (940) 322-1001
Gus A. Saper
Attorney
Mallett Saper & Berg L.L.P.
Campanile South
4306 Yoakum Blvd., Suite 400
Tel: (713) 236-1900
Fax: (713) 228-0321
Lealand W. [Pete] Greene
Attorney at Law
P. O. Box 125
Snyder, TX 79550-0125
325 573.3451
325 573.1445, facsimile
M. Fox Curl
M. Fox Curl & Associates, P.C.
1810 Decatur St.
60
Phone: (832) 567-0846

Fax: (713) 863-9377
Email: foxcurl@yahoo.com
www.foxcurl.com
Stewart S. Davis
Tex. Bar No. 24049644
236 Junction Hwy
Kerrville, Texas 78028
Tel. (830) 257-8851
Fax (830) 896-8730
C.J. McELROY
Bar# : 13581995
301 S. POLK ST. SUITE 660/ AMARILLO, TEXAS 79101
Phone: 806-371-0555
DANIEL LAZARINE
The Law Office of Daniel Lazarine
SBN 24073197
440 Louisiana St, Ste 200
Office: (713) 224-4000
Fax: (713) 224-2815
dan@lazarinelaw.com
Robert F. Alexander
Texas State Bar Number 00997800
rfa2000@flash.net
713-863-1072
MELVYN CARSON BRUDER
516 Turley Law Center
6440 N. Central Expressway
Dallas, TX 75206
214.987.3500
214.987.3518 FAX
melvyn@melvynbruderlaw.com
61
Anne K. Ritchie
Attorney at Law
4001 N. Shepherd Drive
Suite 110
Tel: 832-767-0406
Fax: 832-203-1525
/s/ Susan Criss
SBOT 06630475
719 59th St.
Galveston, TX 77551
409 771 4069
judgecriss@aol.com
Vaavia Edwards
SBN 00796508
301 S. Polk, Suite 620
Tel: (806)371-9333
Fax: (806)371-9335
email vaavia@vaaviaedwards.com
Robert W. Doggett
4920 North IH-35
Austin, Texas 78751
Tel. 512-374-2700
Fax 512-447-3940
rdoggett@trla.org
Robert Blankenship
SBN 00792961
5128 Birchman Ave.
62
Fort Worth TX 76107

817.332.2202
Robert@davidwynnelaw.com
KEITH WOODLEY
WOODLEY & DUDLEY
P. O. Box 99, 306 N. Austin
Comanche, Texas 76442-0099
325/356/2502 Phone
325/356-5193 Fax
John A. Sickel
SBN: 18339500
PO Box 5003
Mabank, Texas 75147
903-848-4500
Fax: 903-848-1168
Email: JASatty@aol.com
J. Eric Reed
00794512
4131 N. Central Expy, Ste 680
Dallas, TX 75204
Jereedlaw@aol.com
Susan N. Kelly
Law Offices of Susan N. Kelly
State Bar # 14862020
510 N. Valley Mills Dr., Ste. 406, Waco, TX 76710
254-751-1818
254-751-9192 (fax)
sdneely1@aol.comPrice
63
Jimmie P. Price
Bar# 16287700
101 Simonton
Conroe, Texas 77301
Telphone 936-756-5511
Fax 936-441-5745
Email :jpprice@priceandprice-law.com
Dennis R. Corman
Bar# 05102000
420 West Second Street
Irving, Texas 75060
Phone 972-2512333
Fax 972-254-4315
email cromanlaw@aol.com
Lynda Smith
3611 Soncy Rd., Ste 4C
806.372.4720
Dianna L. McCoy
SBN
24026865
112 S.W. 8th, Ste. 540, Amarillo, TX 79101
806-373-4025
806-350-5414
dianna.mccoy@gmail.com
David L. McClard
TBN: 24076542
1810 Decatur Street
832-289-1825
713-863-9377
david@mcclardcurl.com
64
Jamie Balagia
Bar# 00783589
313 south main ave
san antonio, tx 78204
Phone 210-394-3833
Fax 210-271-3833
Email jamie@dwidude.com
Wm. S. Harris
William S. Harris
Attorney and Counselor at Law
SBN 09096700
307 West 7th Street, Suite 1905
(817)332-5575; (817)335-6060 FAX
wmsharris.law@sbcglobal.net
Board Certified in Criminal Law
By the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Rober K. Loper
TBN 12562300
111 W. 15th St.
(713) 880-9000
Bob@Loperlaw.net
Past HCCLA Board member
65
Joe Marr Wilson

Board Certified Attorney - Family and Criminal Law
LAW OFFICE OF JOE MARR WILSON
905 South Fillmore, Suite 550
Tel: (806) 374-7758
Fax: (806) 374-0315
jmw@joemarrwilson.com
Charles L. Kessie
SBN 11358050
209 Main Street, Canadian, Texas 79014
806 323 6542 (V) 6413(F)
clkessie@yft.net
Paul SchifferLaw Office of Paul Schiffer
2211 Norfolk St., Suite 610
(713) 521-0059
paul@schifferlawfirm.com
www.schifferlawfirm.com
Clay S. Conrad
LOONEY & CONRAD, P.C.
11767 Katy Freeway, Ste. 740
Houston, TX 77079
Tel: 281-597-8818
Fax: 281-597-8284
Paul Looney
LOONEY & CONRAD, P.C.
11767 Katy Freeway, Ste. 740
Houston, TX 77079
Tel: 281-597-8818
Fax: 281-597-8284
66
Shannon FitzPatrick
Bar# 00790690
P.O. Box 832, San Marcos, TX 78667
Phone: 512-245-2370
Fax: 512-245-9053
Mark D. Griffith
State Bar# 00785928
108 West Main Street
Waxahachie, Texas 75165
Phone 972-938-8343
Fax 972-938-8333
email mark@griffithlegal.com
_____________________________
CELSO VIDAURRI
SBN: 00794791
623 a West Division Street
Arlington, Texas 76011
(817) 801-4444/FAX (817) 801-3400
CelsoV3@aol.com
/s/Chris Abel
Chris Abel
Attorney At Law
2609 Sagebrush Dr.
Suite 202
Flower Mound, Tx. 75028
972-584-7837
Fax: 972-947-3813
Anton E. Hackebeil
Bar No. 08667150
P.O. Box 220
67
Hondo, Texas 78861

830-741-7001- office
866-743-4537 fax
Robert Hirschhorn
Bar # 09719700
217 S. Stemmons, Suite 203
Lewisville, Teas 75067
Phone: 972-434-5879
Fax: 979-434-0176
Lanhom Odom
Attorney At Law
SBN: 15202700
103 N. Mason Street
Bowie, Texas 76230
Telephone: 940-872-7095
Facsimile; 940-872-8095
Shannon Brady Geihsler
Law Office of Shannon Brady Geihsler, PLLC
1001 Main St., Suite 803
Office: (806) 763-3999
Mobile: (806) 781-9296
Fax: (806) 749-3752
E-Mail: sbg@sbgaal.com
Stephen H. Miller
Attorney at Law
704 E. 15th Street, Suite 203
Plano, TX 75074
(972) 578-7097 office; (972) 578-9677 fax
Email: stevemlr@flash.net
Website: www.bestdefensetx.com
AV rated -- Martindale Hubbell Peer Review Ratings
68
Steven Rosen
SBN: 17266200
214 Morton Street
Richmond Texas
713 227 2900
Susan E. Barclay
SBOT# 24045449
Barclay Law Firm, PLLC
921 Ayers Street
Corpus Christi, Texas 78404
Tel: 361.826.0678
Fax: 361.826.0679
Adam Battle Whiteside
Bar# 24086103
430 Buckingham Rd., Apt. 536, Richardson, TX 75081
Phone: 214 991 6083
Email: Adam_whiteside@fd.org
Semper Fi, Patrick McLain
McKinney Place
3131 McKinney Avenue, Suite 825
Dallas, Texas 75204-7426
phone: 214.416.9100
fax:
214.416.9107
e-mail: patrick@patrickjmclain.com
Camille M. Knight
Assistant Federal Public Defender
525 Griffin Street, Suite 629
Dallas, Texas 75202
(214) 767-2746 telephone
(214) 767-2886 facsimile
camille_knight@fd.org
69
Dan Dworin
Attorney at Law
1304 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 479-4009
(512) 478-8643 (fax)
dan@dworinlaw.com
www.dworinlaw.com
Board Certified Criminal Law
James G. Graham
Attorney at Law
Durkin & Graham, P.C.
2125 Martin Drive, Suite 200, Bedford, Texas 76021
Tel: 817-545-9700 Fax: 817-545-5071
*545 East John Carpenter Fwy, Suite 300, Irving, Texas 76052
*Irving Office by appointment only
www.durkinlegal.com
Columbus Monroe Solomon III
24091483
4200 W. Vickery Blvd.,
Second Floor
(817)928-4222
(817)385-6715
Monroe@westfallfirm.com
Jason Galbraith
TX Bar #24072100
2682 Calmwater Drive
Little Elm, TX 75068
(469) 422-7663 Tel
(469) 229-4515 Fax
noblueprints@hotmail.com
70
E. Alan Bennett
SBOT #02140700
510 N. Valley Mills Dr., Ste. 500
Waco, TX 76710
phone:
(254) 772-8022
fax:
(254) 772-9297
email:
abennett@slmpc.com
Fred Stangl
24013556
1217 Avenue K
Lubbock, TX 79401
Phone: 806/765-7370
Fax: 806/765-8150
fredstangl@gmail.com
CJD
Christopher J. Downey
Board Certified, Criminal Law
The Downey Law Firm
SBN: 00787393
2814 Hamilton Street
Tel. (713) 651-0400
Fax. (713) 395-1311
www.downeylawfirm.com
David Kiatta
Texas Bar No.11377750
77 Sugar Creek Center Blvd., Suite 565 Sugar Land, Texas 77478 Office
713-785-8005 Fax 866-785-8040
71
/s/ Jani Maselli Wood

_______________________
JANI J. MASELLI WOOD
Assistant Public Defender
Harris County Texas
1201 Franklin, 13th Floor
Houston Texas 77002
(713) 368-0001
(713) 368-9278 (Fax)
Jani.Maselli@pdo.hctx.net
Sheldon A. Myers
They Myers Law Firm
SBN# 24002669
521 Texas Ave.
El Paso, TX 79901
(915) 532-7700
(915) 532-7701
samyers123@sbcglobal.net
/s/ Scott Pawgan
Scott Pawgan
122 W. Davis, Ste 116
Conroe, TX 77301
Phone: 936-242-6975
Fax: 800-619-5113
Joaquin Jimenez
Bar #24056858
7575 Gulf Fwy
Houston, TX 77017
832.804.8440 ofc
832.804.8048 fax
j.jimenez.law@gmail.com
72
Donald Pieper
24088916
4401 Lido Lane
Houston TX 77092
713-679-8623
DonPieperLaw@gmail.com
Bonnie R. Rogers
The Weycer Law Firm, P.C.
4545 Bissonnet, Suite 294
Bellaire, Texas 77401
Tel: (713) 668-4545
Fax: (713) 668-5115
By:
Bonnie R. Rogers
Kyle Hoelscher, Attorney at Law
Bar no. 24066508
Law Office of Kyle Hoelscher
505 S. Water St., Suite 525
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
khoelscher@hoelscherlaw.com
ph# (361) 765-2907
fax# (361) 288-8422
Patrick F. McCann
Law Offices of Patrick F. McCann
Bar Number 00792680
909 Texas Ave, Ste. 205
713-223-3805
713-226-8097 Fax
73
Kristin Brown, Attorney

The Law Office of Kristin R. Brown, PLLC
Bar Number: 24081458
18208 Preston Road, Ste. D9375
Dallas, Texas 75252
phone: 214-446-3909
fax:
214-481-4868
e-mail: kbrown@idefenddfw.com
74
APPENDIX
A001
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Exhibit G
Exhibit H
Exhibit I
Exhibit J
Exhibit K
Exhibit L
Exhibit M
Exhibit N
Exhibit O
Exhibit P
Exhibit Q
Exhibit R
Exhibit S
Exhibit T
Exhibit U
Exhibit V
Contempt order
Miscellaneous Rule 11-003
Dissenting statement of Judge Alcala
Dissenting statement of Judge Newell
Dissenting statement of Judge Richardson
Show Cause Order
Statement of David R. Dow pursuant to Miscellaneous Rule 11-003
Statement of David R. Dow pursuant to Miscellaneous Rule 11-003
Motion for Leave to File with Timeline
Order Granting Extension
Suggestion to Reconsider
Subsequent Application
Motion to Stay Execution
Motion to Stay Execution
Transcript of Show Cause hearing
Audio recording
Motion for rehearing
Dow affidavit
Communication from Southern District Clerk
Order postponing hearing
Standing order from Northern District
Recusal Motion

David Dow's Petition For Declaration Judgment Or, in The Alternative, Writ of Mandamus

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

David Dow's Petition For Declaration Judgment Or, in The Alternative, Writ of Mandamus

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

No.

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

In suspending Dow, the CCA purported to exercise

Contempt of court ................................................................................ 10

Power to sanction ................................................................................ 10

The ability to suspend an attorney absent fraudulent or

Declaratory judgment is appropriate. ............................................................ 19

PRAYER FOR RELIEF .......................................................................................... 21

APPENDIX ....................................................................................... A-001

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.071 ......................................................................... 17

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On January 14, 2015, in a per curiam1 order, the Texas

Motion for rehearing:

Dow filed a Motion for Rehearing on January 29, 2015.

Declaratory relief stating that the order of suspension

Judge Alcala dissented and would not have suspended Dow.

Pursuant to Article V, section 3 of the Texas Constitution, this Court has

Whether the CCA exceeded its authority and violated Dows

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

medications included Doxepin, Torazine, Mellaril, and Xanax.

Counsel filed in the

Then on January 14, 2015, Dow appeared before the CCA.

proceedings, but, there was an audio recording.

Moreover, undersigned counsel has also attached a certified transcription of the

Neither was there an attorney present

representing either the CCA or the State Bar of Texas.

for rehearing on February 25, 2015. See Exhibits C, D, and E.

This case presents an error that rises to that degree of importance.

Even with the

who might otherwise be willing to represent capital-murder defendants who are

Due process requires that there must be a remedy. The

contempt punishment in Dows case, while not a lawful contempt punishment, is

The CCA Erred In Suspending Dow from the Practice of Law.

professional misconduct. TEX. GOVT CODE 81.072. Disciplinary proceedings

amounted to contempt proceedings, Dow had the right to an impartial prosecutor

He has appeared numerous times before the CCA and as

The fact that a

court may find certain methods distasteful is of no consequence. Rather, only

did not reach such a threshold.

After receiving a letter from an inmate facing

Houston, Texas 77002

The following attorneys declare:

/s/ Nicole DeBorde

George McCall Mac Secrest

DeGUERIN, DICKSON, HENNESSY & WARD

/S/ Edward A. Mallett

1409 NORTH ELM STREET

Former board member, Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association

/s/ Franklin Bynum

/s/ Nicolas Hughes

Houston, Texas 77002

/s/ Nancy Byrd Bunin

1805 13th Street

The Sharkey Law Office

/s/ Vic Sasso

The Hoelscher Law Office

LAW OFFICE OF J. PAUL NELSON

Virginia Marie Raymond

David Patrick Callahan

Mario Del Prado

Georgetown, Texas 78633

Huntsville Texas 77340

Phone: (832) 567-0846