Tuesday, September 24, 2019






SAENZ MUST RECUSE HIMSELF FROM ALL THINGS CASTRO

UPDATE:  MY PHONE RANG AND WOKE ME UP:

Senior Judge Romeo Flores has been assigned to this case.  A search on him does not reveal if he is a senior judge by years worked or retired.  Down the road it could make a difference.  BUT THE BIG STORY IS - He is the Judge who allowed Saenz's niece to walk in the DWI with her brother where they left the victim to die.  Angela Nix was her attorney.  Zachary Blevins has every right to object to this assignment.  The assignment of judge Flores just made all of this even more bizarre.  If he became a senior judge after losing an election, then the objection will not count against Zachary Blevins.  He will still be able to object to another judge.  It is also being reported that in the presence of reporters, Angela Nix's husband threaten to have Zachary Blevins sued.  Angela needs to bring her husband under control or face the State Bar.  Further Castro has sent me endless communications that Angela Nix had the lawsuit ready against Jessica Tetreau with nothing ever being filed.

Okay state records show Judge Flores only served from 84-88.  This means he either lost an election or did not seek reelection.  He gained Senior status through years as a visiting judge.  This means if Zachary Blevins objects to his assignment Zachary Blevins will still be free to object to any other questionable senior judge.

ORIGINAL POST

One, Saenz endorsed Castro for BISD knowing full well he was a convicted felon and not qualified to be on the ballot.  Two, Castro tried to get the influence of Judge Chavez-Vasquez in the event she is assigned his DWI case, and three the dumbest city commissioner we have Nurith Galonsky stated she could be Castro's attorney.  Well no she cannot since the filing agency is the BPD.  This matter is so tainted no one associated with Brownsville or Cameron county can be involved in prosecuting the DWI or removal.

This case is so tainted at every level, including the removal petition, Saenz must ask that the Criminal Section of the Texas AG take control of everything.

The plaintiff's may have to file a motion to disqualify Saenz if he refuses to remove himself.  The case law is clear.  Castro is a convicted felon, and never should have been allowed to take office. Saenz turned a blind eye to this when he endorsed Castro and forms a basis for his removal from the case.

This is a matter the judge should consider first when deciding if Castro should be immediately suspended from office.  It is a real issue.  

Right now the plaintiff's are working pro se.  They need an attorney to ad the convicted felon part.  I have the research all done.

THE LAW IS SIMPLE, THE TRIAL JUDGE ILLEGALLY CHANGED CASTRO'S FELONY CONVICTION ORDER AND SAID NEW ORDER IS VOID

It is permissible to collaterally attack a judgment of one court in another court of equal jurisdiction if the underlying judgment is void.  Browning v. Placke, 698 S.W.2d 362, 363 (Tex.1985). 

IS CASTROS' SECOND SENTENCING ORDER VOID, TO THE EXTENT IT EXISTS?

Yes, - because the trial court had no jurisdiction to issue such an order it is void - a legal nullity.

"This Court's recent decision in State v. Bates, 889 S.W.2d 306 (Tex.Cr.App. 1994) controls the disposition of the instant case.In Bates we affirmed the Eastland Court of Appeals' ruling that a trial court does not have authority to grant a new trial as to punishment only.2 In Bates this Court stated that a new trial for the punishment stage of a criminal action may be granted under Tex. Code Crim.Pro. Art. 44.29. Bates, 889 S.W.2d at 310. However, only appellate courts may grant new trials as to punishment only. Article 44.29(b) reads in pertinent part: 

State v. Hight, 907 S.W.2d 845 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995)

WHAT ABOUT FAIRNESS AND THE TIME WHICH HAS ELAPSED?

Laches in simple terms is an equitable form of limitations - it means if you wait too long to do something you lose.

"However, laches is not applicable when the order subject to the mandamus proceeding is void. See Zimmerman v. Ottis, 941 S.W.2d 259, 262 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1996, orig. proceeding) (“Since mandamus relief in the present case is premised on the entry of a void order, it would not serve the interests of justice or those of the parties to invoke laches as an excuse to ignore that order, and thus to allow the parties to expend further time and effort in connection with a lawsuit that must ultimately be dismissed by the Collin County court or reversed on appeal for want of jurisdiction.”). Therefore, laches is not a bar to mandamus relief in this case".

IN RE: Curtis and Shelley CHESTER, Relators.

The case law is clear, the trial court had no legal authority to resentence Castro and remove the felony conviction. This by itself will allow the assigned judge to immediately remove Castro from office. Castro will resign before he allows such a hearing to move forward. It will solidy no doubt in his felony conviction and impact many of his rights.


BACK TO SLEEP - I JUST WOKE UP AT ABOUT 2:45.  I FELL ASLEEP AT ABOUT 10:30 FROM AN INTENSE HEADACHE

No comments: