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 DOW’S 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: [email protected]

Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
440 Louisiana, Suite 800
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
Email: [email protected]
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
712 Main St., Ste 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 713-526-6300
Fax: 713-228-0034
Email: [email protected]
Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
440 Louisiana, Suite 800
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
Email: [email protected]

i

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. App’x 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. GOV’T CODE § 21.002...................................................................................... 10
TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.108...................................................................................... 16
TEX. GOV’T CODE § 81.011..............................................................................2, 9, 14
TEX. GOV’T CODE § 81.072.................................................................................. 9, 14
TEX. GOV’T 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.

1

Judge Alcala dissented and would not have suspended Dow.

3

Dow further contends that the CCA erroneously concluded that he violated the court’s
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. GOV’T 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. GOV’T 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).

4

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 Court’s 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 Dow’s
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. Dow’s Work on Parede’s Death Penalty Case Leading Up to the Improper
Suspension.
David Dow regularly represents on appeal individuals who have been
sentenced to death. Many of Dow’s 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 Dow’s
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 Paredes’s federally-appointed habeas counsel,
who accepted Dow’s offer to substitute in as lead counsel for any additional
litigation and promptly handed over the case file. Id. Dow’s 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 case’s 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, Paredes’s 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 defendant’s 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 Paredes’s 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 Paredes’s 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 Paredes’s 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. App’x 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 Paredes’s previous counsel, raised a claim of actual innocence,
which rested on two affidavits obtained by Paredes’s 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 Paredes’s life. Exhibit I at 5-6.

11

Although the Fifth Circuit subsequently denied Paredes relief, it appears likely that had
Paredes’s Rule 60 motion been considered by the Fifth Circuit three months later, the court
would have held differently, in view of the Supreme Court’s 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 Paredes’s, 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.

5

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 CCA’s 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,
Dow’s 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.
”
Dow’s Appearance Before the CCA and the CCA’s 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 CCA’s 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 Court’s 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 Dow’s 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,

9

federal courts to impose reciprocal discipline. For example, the clerk for the
Southern District of Texas took action to terminate Dow’s 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
district’s 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 clerk’s 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. Gov’t 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 Dow’s 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 CCA’s 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 Dow’s position to decide not to file
documents for inmates facing execution. See Exhibit C at 10-11 (“This Court’s
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 inmate’s 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 (Dow’s 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.
Dow’s 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 CCA’s
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 Dow’s 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 it’s contempt authority.

13

The CCA Erred In Suspending Dow from the Practice of Law.
There can be no doubt that the CCA’s 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
CCA’s 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 CCA’s 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. GOV’T 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. GOV’T 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. GOV’T CODE § 81.071.

An attorney is entitled to due course of law and due process before being
disciplined
To insure that an attorney’s 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. GOV’T CODE § 81.072. Disciplinary proceedings
are initiated by referral to the Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the State Bar of Texas.
TEX. GOV’T 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 Dow’s 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 Court’s authority by suspending Dow from the practice of law.
B. Dow’s 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. GOV’T 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 CCA’s 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. GOV’T 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 CCA’s 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. GOV’T CODE § 82.061. The CCA did not make any fact
findings about the nature of Dow’s 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, Dow’s 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 Dow’s
actions were fraudulent or dishonorable. To the contrary, Dow’s 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 attorney’s
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 CCA’s 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, Dow’s 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. Counsel’s actions in filing on October 21 did not interfere with
the CCA’s 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 Dow’s pleadings were not so
overly complicated that the delay impacted the defendant’s 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 Dow’s actions had interfered with the
CCA’s 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 CCA’s 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 Dow’s 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
712 Main St., Ste 2400

18

On behalf of only one client since 2010 has the timing of Dow’s filings been such that a
statement pursuant to the CCA’s Rule 11-003 was required, and as Dow explained in that case,
the late filing was caused by the fact that the trial court’s 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

Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 713-526-6300
Fax: 713-228-0034
Email: [email protected]
And
Casie L. Gotro
TBN: 24048505
440 Louisiana, Suite 800
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: 832-368-9281
Fax: 832-201-8273
Email: [email protected]
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/Relator’s 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
[email protected].
/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
Houston, Texas 77002
713-757-0679
713-650-1602 fax
Email: [email protected]
KENT A. SCHAFFER
TBA No. 17724300
JPMorganChase Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: [email protected]
Past President TCDLA
Dick Deguerin
DeGUERIN, DICKSON, HENNESSY & WARD
State Bar No. 05638000
1018 Preston, 7th Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 223-5959 Telephone
(713) 223-9231 Facsimile
Email: [email protected]
24

DeGUERIN, DICKSON, HENNESSY & WARD
/s/Matt Hennessy
Matt Hennessy
[email protected]
State Bar No. 00787677
1018 Preston, 7th Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 223-5959 Telephone
(713) 223-9231 Facsimile
Kevin Dubose
State Bar No. 06150500
1844 Harvard Street
Houston, Texas 77008
Marcy Hogan Greer
State Bar No. 08417650
515 Congress Ave., Suite 2350
Austin, Texas 78701
TRICHTER & MURPHY, P.C.
By:
_____________________________
DOUG MURPHY
SBN 24013215
The Kirby Mansion
2000 Smith Street
Houston, Texas 77002
Tel: (713) 524-1010
Lydia Clay Jackson
Law Office of L. Clay-Jackson, PLLC
State Bar Number 04332450
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
Houston, Texas 77006
Tel: (713) 236-1900
Fax: (713) 228-0321
____________________________________
DAVID R. BIRES
TBA No. 02335000
JP Morgan Bank Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: [email protected]
Past TCDLA President
CHRISTOPHER L. TRITICO
Tritico Rainey PLLC
State Bar No. 20232050
1212 Durham Drive
Houston, Texas 77007
(713) 581-3399
(713) 581-3360 (Facsimile)
____________________________
Randy Schaffer
State Bar No. 17724500
1301 McKinney, Suite 3100
Houston, Texas 77010
(713) 951-9555
(713) 951-9854 (facsimile)
[email protected]

26

__________________________________
Carmen Roe
SBN: 24048773
440 Louisiana, Suite 900
Houston, Texas 77002
President of Harris County Criminal
Lawyers Association (HCCLA)
Chip B. Lewis
State Bar Number 00791107
1207 S. Shepherd
Houston, Texas 77019
713-523-7878
713-523-7887 Fax www.chiplewislaw.com
[email protected]
Alicia Devoy ONeill
State Bar Number 24040801
1207 S. Shepherd
Houston, Texas 77019
713-523-7878
713-523-7887 Fax
www.chiplewislaw.com
[email protected]
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: [email protected]
SARAH ROLAND
STATE BAR NO. 24049077
27

1409 NORTH ELM STREET
DENTON, TEXAS 76201
TEL: (940) 323-9305
FAX: (940) 312-6830
EMAIL: [email protected]
J. Michael Jaynes
State Bar No. 10595800
4324 N. Beltline Road, Suite C111
Irving, Texas 75038-3594
972-570-7733
972-570-9094 fax
[email protected]
/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 76703‒0975
(254) 752‒5678
(254) 752‒7792—Facsimile
E‒mail: [email protected]
State Bar No. 17880500

28

Ali Fazel
Scardino & Fazel
State Bar Number
Attorneys at Law
SBN: 24012611
Sweeney, Coombs & Fredericks Bldg.
1004 Congress St., 3rd Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
Tel: 713-229-9292
Fax: 713-229-9931
Robert Scardino
Scardino & Fazel
State Bar Number 17719500
Attorneys at Law
Sweeney, Coombs & Fredericks Bldg.
1004 Congress St., 3rd Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
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
[email protected]
Anthony Scardino
Scardino & Fazel
State Bar Number 24066029
Attorneys at Law
Sweeney, Coombs & Fredericks Bldg.
1004 Congress St., 3rd Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
29

Tel: 713-229-9292
Fax: 713-229-9931
Jonathan Landers
State Bar Number 24070101
2817 W T.C. Jester
Houston Texas 77018
(713) 301-3153 (work)
(713) 685-5020 (FAX)
[email protected]
Josh Schaffer
SB 24037439
1301 McKinney, Suite 3100
Houston, Texas 77010
(713) 951-9555
(713) 951-9854 (fax)
[email protected]
www.schafferfirm.com

Maurie Levin
Texas Bar No. 00789452
Robert J. Fickman
Attorney at Law
State Bar Number 06956500
1229 Heights Boulevard
Houston, Texas 77008
(713) 655-7400 (o)
(713) 224-5533 (f)
www.fickmanlaw.com
/s/ Randall L. Kallinen
Randall L. Kallinen
State Bar Number 00790995
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
Houston, Texas 77012
Telephone: 713/320-3785
FAX: 713/893-6737
E-mail: [email protected]
/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
[email protected]
Clinical Professor Robert C. Owen
Texas Bar No. 15371950
Bluhm Legal Clinic
Northwestern University School of Law
375 East Chicago Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611
312.503.0135 voice
312.503.8977 facsimile
[email protected]
31

/s/ Franklin Bynum
Franklin Bynum
Texas Bar Number 24069451
Bynum Law Office
501 North Interstate 35
Austin, Texas 78702
[email protected]
(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
[email protected]
Steven J. Lieberman
Attorney at Law
State Bar Number 122334020
712 Main St., Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 228-8500
(713) 228-0034 (Fax)
[email protected]
Gemayel Haynes
SBN 24059918
723 Main St. #1020
Houston, Texas 77002
Phone 713.256.1993
Fax 713.456.2322

32

Jordan M. Steiker
Texas Bar No. 19126495
University of Texas Law School
727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, Texas 78705
Tel. 512-232-1346
Fax 512-471-6988
Email: [email protected]
Mekisha Jane Walker
Attorney at Law
State Bar Number 24037661
1714 Sunset Blvd.
Houston, Texas 77005
713.228.2611Office
888.307.1772Fax
[email protected]
www.walkerlawhouston.com
Alexander Bunin
State Bar No. 03344700
501 Gale Street
Houston, TX 77009
713-301-0381
[email protected]
Clausell Parrish, PLLC.
Damon Parrish II, Attorney
State Bar Number 24061991
3033 Chimney Rock, Suite 205
Houston, TX 77056
O: 713-228-2255
F: 713-228-2265
[email protected]

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
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
/s/ Jennifer R. Gaut
Jennifer R. Gaut
SBN: 24068765
River Oaks Tower
3730 Kirby Dr., Ste. 1120
Houston, Texas 77098
Off: (713) 520 – 5223
Fax: (888) 680 – 6837
Email: [email protected]

34

/s/Gene P. Tausk_______
TBN: 24003035
1221 Studewood
Houston, TX 77008
(713) 429-5476
(713) 490-3150 (fax)
[email protected]
JAVIER O. MARTINEZ
TBA No. 24082538
JPMorganChase Bank Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: [email protected]
Sandra Oballe
State Bar Number 24039093
Law Office of Sandra J. Oballe
1216 N. Velasco, Suite H
Angleton, Texas 77515
713.524.6656
[email protected]
Daniel De La Garza
Law Office of Daniel De La Garza
State Bar Number 24077965
115 E. Travis St., Ste. 1542
San Antonio, Texas 78205
210-222-1888 Office
210-579-9304 Fax
[email protected]

35

/s/ Nicolas Hughes
NICOLAS HUGHES
Attorney at Law
1414 Cleveland St., Unit A
Houston Texas 77019
(713) 256-3212
TBA No. 24059981
[email protected]
W. Troy McKinney
Schneider & McKinney, P.C.State Bar Number 13725020
440 Louisiana, Suite 800
Houston, Texas 77002
713-951-9994
713-224-6008 (fax)
http://www.texascriminaldefenselawyers.com
http://www.houstondwiattorneys.com/
[email protected]
JAMES M. KENNEDY
TBA No. 24008754
JPMorgan Chase Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: [email protected]
TAMMY BUTLER KIDD
TBA No. 24012960
JPMorgan Chase Bank Building
712 Main Street, Suite 2400
Houston, Texas 77002
Telephone: (713) 228-8500
Facsimile: (713) 228-0034
Email: [email protected]

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
Texas Bar No. 11104050
Lee Kovarsky
Texas Bar No. 24053310
Naomi Terr
Texas Bar No. 24033379
Katherine C. Black
Texas Bar No. 24064907
Burke M. Butler
Texas Bar No. 24092205
Elizabeth Hoefer
Bar No. 24092527
TEXAS DEFENDER SERVICE
1927 Blodgett
Houston, Texas 77004
Tel. 713-222-7788
Fax 713-222-0260
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Benjamin B. Wolff
Texas Bar No. 4628228
Alma Lagarda
Texas Bar No. 24055810
TEXAS DEFENDER SERVICE
510 South Congress
37

Suite 304
Austin, Texas 78704
Tel. 512-320-8300
Fax 512-477-2153
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
Paul E. Mansur
Texas Bar No. 00796078
TEXAS DEFENDER SERVICE
P.O. Box 1300
Denver City, Texas 79323
Tel. 806-215-1025
Fax 806-592-9136
Email: [email protected]
Mandy Welch
Burr & Welch PC
State Bar Number 21125380
Leggett, Texas 77350
Mandy Welch
/s/ David A. Schulman
_______________________________
David A. Schulman
Attorney at Law
SBN 17833400
Post Office Box 783
Austin, Texas 78767
[email protected]
Tel. 512-474-4747
Fax: 512-532-6282
/s/ Curtis Barton
Curtis Barton
State Bar Number 24042649
1201 Franklin St., Fl. 13
38

Houston, Texas 77002
Phone: 713-368-0016
Lori A. Botello
Attorney & Counselor at Law
9219 Katy Freeway, Suite 246
Houston, Texas 77024
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
Houston, Texas 77288
David O'Neil
Habern, O'Neil & Associates
SBN 15284700
Cynthia Eva Hujar Orr
State Bar Number 15313350
29th Floor Tower Life Building
San Antonio, Texas 78205
210-226-1463
Best Lawyers in America in White Collar Crime
Wendell Odom
State Bar Number 15208500
440 Louisiana, suite 200,
Houston, TX 77002

39

Steven H. Halpert
Juvenile Division Chief
Harris County Public Defender’s Office
1201 Franklin Street, 13th Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
Tel: 713-368-0016
Fax: 713-437-4005
Keith S. Hampton
Attorney at Law
State Bar Number 08873230
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
Houston, Texas 77002
Attorney at Law
Jim Darnell, P.C.
State Bar Number 05391250
310 N. Mesa St., Ste. 212
El Paso, Texas 79901
Phone (915) 532-2442
Fax (915) 532-4549
[email protected]

40

Stan Brown
P.O. Box 3122
Abilene, TX 79604
325-677-1851
fax 677-3107
cell 725-8882
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
s/____________________
Carl R Pruett
Sbot 16364800
202 Travis, Ste 50
Houston, Texas 77002
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
[email protected]
Vik Vij
State Bar Number 24063855
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
[email protected]
SBN 01894100
Frank Sellers
Texas Bar No. 24080305
Hurley, Guinn & Sellers
1805 13th Street
Lubbock, Texas 79401
806.771.0700 tel
806.763.8199 fax
[email protected]
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
State Bar No. 00784728
David Hurley
Hurley, Guinn & Sellers
State Bar Number 10310200.
43

1805 13th Street
Lubbock, Texas 79401
(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)
State Bar No. 08195000
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: [email protected]
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
Houston, Texas 77055
(713) 683-1007
(713) 683-1067
[email protected]
/s/ John P. Denholm
JOHN P. DENHOLM
State Bar No. 24063596
SDTX Admission No. 933213
397 N. Sam Houston Pkwy E., Suite 325
Tel: 832-448-1148
Fax: 832-448-1147
[email protected]
/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
Houston, Texas 77060
Phone
832-448-1148
Fax 832-448-1147
Matthew J. Kita
Texas Bar No. 24050883
P.O. Box 5119
Dallas, Texas 75208
214.699.1863 (phone) / 214.347.7221 (fax)
[email protected]
45

Danny Easterling
Past President of Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
Bar # 06362100
1018 Preston Sixth Floor
Houston, Texas 77002
713-228-4441
Fax 713-228-4072
[email protected]
Justin C. Harris
24078634
1229 Heights Blvd
Houston, Texas 77008
713-224-5529
713-224-5533 fax
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
Robert Pelton
bar 15733500
4001 north shepherd, suite 110
Houston ,Texas 77018 713 524 8471
[email protected]
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: [email protected]
Wayne A. Fowler
24069044
9500 Ray White Rd, Ste 200
Keller, TX 76244
(817) 609-4050
(817) 350-6346
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
George E. Renneberg
Bar# 16778600
417 Nugent Street, Conroe, TX 77301
Phone 936-756-8181
Fax 936-756-8112
Email [email protected]
Rick Oliver
TBN: 24048179
1221 Studewood Street
Houston, TX 77008
Phone: (713) 864-3700
Fax: (713) 864-3703
Email: [email protected]
Don Flanary
Goldstein Goldstein and Hilley
310 South St. Mary's Street, Suite 2900
San Antonio, Texas 78205
Texas Bar No. 24045877
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)
[email protected]
Paul Holt Walcutt
SBN 24049855
600 W. 13th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 322-9756 Phone
(512) 451-5882 Fax
[email protected]
Christopher L King
TXBN 24088864
100 N 6th St, Suite 902
Waco, TX 76701
(2540 717-8600
(2540 754-4824
[email protected]
Drew Willey
Bar#: 24093371
1215 Marconi St., Unit C, Houston, TX 77019
Phone: 713-739-9455
Fax: 713-510-1950
Email: [email protected]
Bob Mabry Attorney at Law PLLC
304 North Main Street #6
Conroe Texas 77301-3002
(936) 228-7796
Fax 1-866-394-3113
[email protected]
Texas Bar Association 12750980

49

Mark R. Thiessen
Attorney At Law
Bar Number 24042025
1221 Studewood Street
Houston, Texas 77008
Office: 713-864-9000
Fax: 713-964-9006
Email: [email protected]
www.thetexastrialattorney.com
James Huggler
State Bar 00795437
100 E. Ferguson, Suite 805
Tyler, Texas 75702
903-593-2400
903-593-3830 fax
[email protected]
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 [email protected]
Robert Blankenship
SBN 00792961
5128 Birchman Ave.
Fort Worth TX 76107
817.332.2202
[email protected]

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
Texas Bar No. 14899250
Email: [email protected]
Dan Cogdell
SBOT 04501500
402 Main, 4th Floor
Houston, Tx. 77002
713 426 2244 (Main)
713 426 2255 (Fax)
[email protected]
Don L Wilson
State Bar number 21677500
334 Chestnut
Abilene, Texas 79602
325-673-8124
325-673-9368 (fax)
[email protected]
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 César Chávez Street
Austin, Texas 78702
Office phone: 512.472.6270
Cello phone: 512.748.0940
Fax: 512.472.8263
[email protected]
Raúl A. Cáñez
Texas Bar Number 00794999
Law Office of Raúl A. Cáñez
301 College Avenue
Fort Worth, Texas 76104
Phone: 817-886-0651
Fax: 817-886-0689
Email: [email protected]
Virginia Carter
Attorney At Law
300 Burnett, Ste 130
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
817-877-5151
Catherine Clare Bernhard
Bar No. 02216575
P.O. Box 2817
Red Oak, Texas 75154
972-617-5548
fax-972-671-5547
[email protected]
Cynthia Henley
Bar# 17409100
7626 E. Jordan Cove, Houston, TX 77055
Phone 713-222-1220
Fax none
Email: [email protected]
52

David Patrick Callahan
Bar# 24037999
2216 Walter Smith Court, Azle, Texas 76020
Phone: (817) 905-5322
Fax: (817) 237-5532
Email: [email protected]
R. Walton Weaver
State Bar Number 00785198
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
State Bar No. 24075602
PO Box 763
Bushland, TX 79012
tel: 806-437-1302
fax: 806-437-1307
[email protected]
Alex G. Azzo
Bar# : 01475500
P.O. Box 801231, Houston, TX 77280
Phone: (713) 822-6915
email: [email protected]
53

Mario Del Prado
222 E. Main Plaza
05653600
San Antonio, Texas 78205
(210) 698-3533 Telephone
(210) 698-3701 Fax
www.delpradolaw.com
[email protected]
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
State Bar Number 00794533
Board Certified - Criminal Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
The Ritenour Law Firm, PC
115 E. Travis St., Suite 1716
San Antonio, Texas 78205
Ph:(210) 222-0125
Fax: (210) 222-2467
[email protected]
Bobby D. Mims
Bar# 12172200
216 W. Erwin Street, Suite 300A
Tyler, Texas 75702
903-595-2160
Fax 903-596-0719
email [email protected]
Mary Heafner
Bar No. 09325500
5110 Mimosa
Bellaire, Texas 77401
(713) 269 0467
54

[email protected]
Patti Sedita
Attorney at Law
One Sugar Creek Center Blvd, Suite 1045
Sugar Land, TX 77478
[email protected]
(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 [email protected]
John Grant Jones
Bar# 10917000
208 Pipe Creek Lane
55

Georgetown, Texas 78633
Phone: 361-815-2470
Fax: 1-866-243-9810
email: [email protected]
MORGAN A. BOURQUE
SBN 24062627
24 Waterway Avenue, Suite 660
The Woodlands, Texas 77380
Telephone: (713) 862-7766
Facsimile: (832) 813-0321
Email: [email protected]
T. Brent Mayr
SBN 24037052
4101 Washington Ave, 2nd Floor
Houston, TX 77007
713-808-9613
713-808-9991 fax
[email protected]
Anthony S. Haughton, Esq.,
Haughton & Associates
3013 Fountain View, Suite 145
Houston, TX 77057
(713) 782-6060
(713) 953-7482
[email protected]
Ralph Dowden
24040828
1108 North Locust Street
Denton, Texas 76201
(214) 436-5194
[email protected]
/s/ Thomas H. Burton, III
Thomas H. Burton, III

56

Attorney at Law
SBOT No. 24009927
723 Main Street, Suite 905
Houston, Texas 77002
Cell (713) 933-5323
Tel. (713) 741-9301
Fax (713) 741-9302
David Suhler
Attorney at Law
State Bar Number 19465900
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)
[email protected]
Mackenzie "Mack" Schaffer
Attorney at Law
State Bar No. 24093111
1301 McKinney St., Suite 3100
Houston, Texas 77010
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 José R. Villanueva
Bar Number 00794794
PO Box 570
Waco, Texas 76703
(254) 230-2710
(866)821-1162
[email protected]
CANDELARIO ELIZONDO
Bar # 06521500
1018 Preston #200 Houston , Texas 77002. # 06521500
[email protected]
/s/ Joseph A. Connors III
Joseph A. Connors III
Attorney At Law
Texas Bar No. 04705400
P. O. Box 5838
McAllen, Texas 78502-5838
956-687-8218office
956-687-8230fax
[email protected]
Betty Blackwell
Bar Card #12779300
1306 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701
512-479-0149
512-320-8743
Email: [email protected]

58

Steven Denny
SBN:24005798
2414 Line Ave, Amarillo, TX 79106
806-379-2010
806-379-2012
[email protected]
William E. Harrison
State Bar #00789780
Harrison & Dietrich, PLLC
215 Simonton
Conroe, Texas 77301
(936) 828-3898 (Telephone)
(936) 828-3965 (Facsimile)
[email protected]
/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)
[email protected]
JAMES EDD WOOLDRIDGE
SB# 24010492
Attorney & Counselor at Law
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: [email protected]
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
Houston, Texas 77006
Tel: (713) 236-1900
Fax: (713) 228-0321
State Bar No. 17646500
Lealand W. [Pete] Greene
Texas Bar No. 08394000
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.
State Bar Number 24045737
Houston, Texas 77007
60

Phone: (832) 567-0846
Fax: (713) 863-9377
Email: [email protected]
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
Houston, Texas 77002
Office: (713) 224-4000
Fax: (713) 224-2815
[email protected]
Robert F. Alexander
Texas State Bar Number 00997800
[email protected]
713-863-1072
MELVYN CARSON BRUDER
Attorney & Counselor at Law
516 Turley Law Center
6440 N. Central Expressway
Dallas, TX 75206
214.987.3500
214.987.3518 FAX
[email protected]
61

Anne K. Ritchie
Attorney at Law
4001 N. Shepherd Drive
Suite 110
Houston, Texas 77018
Tel: 832-767-0406
Fax: 832-203-1525
/s/ Susan Criss
SBOT 06630475
719 59th St.
Galveston, TX 77551
409 771 4069
[email protected]
Vaavia Edwards
SBN 00796508
301 S. Polk, Suite 620
Amarillo, Texas 79101
Tel: (806)371-9333
Fax: (806)371-9335
email [email protected]
Robert W. Doggett
Texas Bar No. 05945650
4920 North IH-35
Austin, Texas 78751
Tel. 512-374-2700
Fax 512-447-3940
[email protected]
Robert Blankenship
SBN 00792961
5128 Birchman Ave.
62

Fort Worth TX 76107
817.332.2202
[email protected]

KEITH WOODLEY
State Bar No. 21936500
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: [email protected]
J. Eric Reed
00794512
4131 N. Central Expy, Ste 680
Dallas, TX 75204
[email protected]
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)
[email protected]
63

Jimmie P. Price
Bar# 16287700
101 Simonton
Conroe, Texas 77301
Telphone 936-756-5511
Fax 936-441-5745
Email :[email protected]
Dennis R. Corman
Bar# 05102000
420 West Second Street
Irving, Texas 75060
Phone 972-2512333
Fax 972-254-4315
email [email protected]
Lynda Smith
Texas Bar Number 18632070
3611 Soncy Rd., Ste 4C
Amarillo, Texas 79119
806.372.4720
Dianna L. McCoy
SBN
24026865
112 S.W. 8th, Ste. 540, Amarillo, TX 79101
806-373-4025
806-350-5414
[email protected]
David L. McClard
TBN: 24076542
1810 Decatur Street
832-289-1825
713-863-9377
[email protected]
64

Jamie Balagia
Bar# 00783589
313 south main ave
san antonio, tx 78204
Phone 210-394-3833
Fax 210-271-3833
Email [email protected]
Wm. S. Harris
William S. Harris
Attorney and Counselor at Law
SBN 09096700
307 West 7th Street, Suite 1905
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
(817)332-5575; (817)335-6060 FAX
[email protected]
Board Certified in Criminal Law
By the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Rober K. Loper
TBN 12562300
111 W. 15th St.
Houston, Texas 77008
(713) 880-9000
[email protected]
Past HCCLA Board member

65

Joe Marr Wilson
Board Certified Attorney - Family and Criminal Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
LAW OFFICE OF JOE MARR WILSON
905 South Fillmore, Suite 550
Amarillo, Texas 79101
Tel: (806) 374-7758
Fax: (806) 374-0315
[email protected]
Charles L. Kessie
SBN 11358050
209 Main Street, Canadian, Texas 79014
806 323 6542 (V) 6413(F)
[email protected]
Paul SchifferLaw Office of Paul Schiffer
2211 Norfolk St., Suite 610
Houston, Texas 77098
(713) 521-0059
[email protected]
www.schifferlawfirm.com
Clay S. Conrad
LOONEY & CONRAD, P.C.
State Bar Number 00795301
11767 Katy Freeway, Ste. 740
Houston, TX 77079
Tel: 281-597-8818
Fax: 281-597-8284
Paul Looney
LOONEY & CONRAD, P.C.
State Bar Number 12555900
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 [email protected]
_____________________________
CELSO VIDAURRI
SBN: 00794791
623 a West Division Street
Arlington, Texas 76011
(817) 801-4444/FAX (817) 801-3400
[email protected]
/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
Lubbock, Texas 79401
Office: (806) 763-3999
Mobile: (806) 781-9296
Fax: (806) 749-3752
E-Mail: [email protected]
Stephen H. Miller
Attorney at Law
704 E. 15th Street, Suite 203
Plano, TX 75074
(972) 578-7097 office; (972) 578-9677 fax
Email: [email protected]
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: [email protected]
Semper Fi, Patrick McLain
Texas Bar No. 13737480
McKinney Place
3131 McKinney Avenue, Suite 825
Dallas, Texas 75204-7426
phone: 214.416.9100
fax:
214.416.9107
e-mail: [email protected]
Camille M. Knight
Assistant Federal Public Defender
Texas Bar No. 24027124
525 Griffin Street, Suite 629
Dallas, Texas 75202
(214) 767-2746 telephone
(214) 767-2886 facsimile
[email protected]
69

Dan Dworin
Attorney at Law
State Bar No. 00793663
1304 Nueces Street
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 479-4009
(512) 478-8643 (fax)
[email protected]
www.dworinlaw.com
Board Certified – Criminal Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
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
[email protected]
Jason Galbraith
TX Bar #24072100
2682 Calmwater Drive
Little Elm, TX 75068
(469) 422-7663 Tel
(469) 229-4515 Fax
[email protected]
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:
[email protected]

Fred Stangl
24013556
1217 Avenue K
Lubbock, TX 79401
Phone: 806/765-7370
Fax: 806/765-8150
[email protected]
CJD
Christopher J. Downey
Board Certified, Criminal Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
The Downey Law Firm
SBN: 00787393
2814 Hamilton Street
Houston, Texas 77004
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
State Bar Number 00791195
1201 Franklin, 13th Floor
Houston Texas 77002
(713) 368-0001
(713) 368-9278 (Fax)
[email protected]
Sheldon A. Myers
They Myers Law Firm
SBN# 24002669
521 Texas Ave.
El Paso, TX 79901
(915) 532-7700
(915) 532-7701
[email protected]
/s/ Scott Pawgan
Scott Pawgan
State Bar No. 24002739
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
[email protected]

72

Donald Pieper
24088916
4401 Lido Lane
Houston TX 77092
713-679-8623
[email protected]
Bonnie R. Rogers
The Weycer Law Firm, P.C.
4545 Bissonnet, Suite 294
Bellaire, Texas 77401
State Bar No. 24027813
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
[email protected]
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
Houston, Texas 77002
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: [email protected]

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