Texas Supreme Court, 1987

Ex Parte Strickland

Texas Supreme Court · Decided February 11, 1987 · Per Curiam

723 S.W.2d 668; 30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 216; 1987 Tex. LEXIS 291 (South Western Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Brown (Tex. App. 2003)
Ex Parte Morgan (Tex. App. 1994)
Ex Parte: Matthew Rueben Phillips v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023)
in Re Bruce Carter (Tex. App. 2014)
in Re Roberto John Johnson (Tex. App. 2009)
In re Richardson (Tex. App. 2007)
in Re: Adam Hugh Richardson (Tex. App. 2007)
in the Estate of John A. Wilson, Sr. (Tex. App. 2006)
in Re Raymond Glenn Hancock (Tex. App. 2006)
Ex Parte Littleton (Tex. App. 2003)
in Re: Anthony E. Gill (Tex. App. 2003)
Ex Parte: Andrew Littleton (Tex. App. 2003)
in Re: Earl Steven Brown, Relator (Tex. App. 2003)
in Re: Earl Steven Brown, Relator (Tex. App. 2003)
in Re: Earl Steven Brown, Relator (Tex. App. 2003)
In re White (Tex. App. 2001)
in Re Edward Ray Ustick (Tex. App. 2000)
In re Markowitz (Tex. App. 1998)
Ex Parte Whitehead (Tex. App. 1995)
Ex Parte Herrera (Tex. App. 1991)
Ex Parte Sinclair (Tex. App. 1988)
Ex Parte Bagwell (Tex. App. 1988)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a child support habeas corpus proceeding. Roy Clifton Strickland was found in contempt for failure to pay court-ordered child support, and incarcerated without either a written judgment of contempt or a written order of commitment. Due process requires both a written judgment of contempt and a written order of commitment in order to punish a person for constructive contempt of court. Ex parte Barnett, 600 S.W.2d 252, 256 (Tex. 1980); Ex parte Puckitt, 159 Tex. 438, 322 S.W.2d 597 (1959); see also Ex parte Hardin, 161 Tex. 567, 334 S.W.2d 152 (1961). Both requisites are missing in this proceeding. Because Strickland’s adjudication of contempt and incarceration is contrary to our holdings in the above cases, we grant the writ without hearing oral argument. See Ex parte Davila, 718 S.W.2d 281 (Tex. 1986). In view of this conclusion, we need not address Strickland’s other grounds.

Relator is ordered discharged.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.