Judiciary of Texas

src: s3.amazonaws.com

The structure of Judiciary of Texas is laid out in Article 5 of the Texas Constitution and subsequently determined by law, in particular the Texas Government Code and the Texas Probate Code.

The structure is very complex, featuring many layers of courts, many examples of overlapping jurisdictions (both in terms of numbers in the controversy and territorial), so many differences between districts, and unusual bifurcation betting systems found only in one other country. : Oklahoma.

The City Court is the most active court, with District and District Courts handling most other cases and sharing the same court building often.

Administration is the responsibility of the Texas Supreme Court, assisted by the Texas District Court Administration Office, the Texas Judicial Council, and the State Bar of Texas. The State Bar of Texas (SBOT) is a mandatory bar, not just a bar association (such as ABA or local bar association). To practice law in a Texas court, an attorney should be licensed, and must pay dues. The public can obtain basic information about all Texas lawyers, including their bar numbers, license status, and disciplinary notes, from the Bar website.

Video Judiciary of Texas

History and perception

In the 19th century, Texas had an arbitrary "border justice" reputation; in a famous example highlighted by Stanford law historian Lawrence M. Friedman, his appeals court upheld the belief of "honesty" (where that was omitted) in 1879 but reversed the "guity" belief (where the l was omitted) in 1886. The final decision really tries to distinguish the previous one by trying to explain why the letter l is more important than the bad the quality of Texas justice has been linked to the country's shortage of proper law schools and law libraries, as well as Texas's traditional preferences for "self-help" justice as it did in court 'Judge Winchester' or 'Judge Lynch.' "

Maps Judiciary of Texas

Court

Texas is the only state other than Oklahoma that has a bifurcation appeal system at the highest level. The Texas Supreme Court heard calls involving civil matters, and the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals heard petitions involving criminal matters. Sometimes, the line is cloudy, especially related to jurisdiction in the case of mandamus and habeas corpus. View, e.g. Willet's Justice's Disagreements at In Re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. 2011) (orig. Continue). Unlike its counterparts in Oklahoma, the Texas Supreme Court is not really the highest when it comes to ping-pong jurisdiction or war tugs between two high courts because they are both alike.

Article V, Section 1, states:

[t] the judicial authorities of this State shall be granted in one Supreme Court, in a Criminal Court of Appeal, in the Court of Appeal, in the District Court, in the District Court, in the Court of Commissioners, in the Court of Justice of Peace, and in other courts which may be provided by law. The legislature may establish other courts deemed necessary and establish jurisdiction and organization thereof, and may adapt the district jurisdiction and other inferior courts.

Thus, the Texas Legislature has made additional trials to address the pressure of caseload fueled by population growth in different regions of the country. District courts are usually (usually) numbered regardless of whether they specialize in dealing with criminal, civil or family issues (although in some districts the District Court of Criminal has separate numbering systems, for example Dallas County which has seven such courts numbering 1 to 11 ). The highest figures indicate that a court has just been created, but the numbers alone do not provide a clue as to the location of the new court and district appeals in which it is located. Thus, a full list of Dallas courts can be found to include 60 courts in Dallas.

The next section of Article V outlines the basic requirements for each court jurisdiction and for its officers.

Supreme Court

The Texas Supreme Court hears petitions involving civil matters and does not hear appeals involving criminal matters except when the defendant is a teenager. Under Texas law, the juvenile process (even involving criminal activity) is considered a civil issue under the Texas Family Code; thus, the Texas Supreme Court heard such calls, but he opposed the Criminal Court of Appeal in Texas in matters to be interpreted in the Texas Penal Code. The Supreme Court is also responsible for the licenses and discipline of lawyers.

Criminal Court of Appeal

The Texas Criminal Court of Appeal adjudicates appeals against criminal cases, excluding those involving the juvenile process. Cases in which death penalty is imposed directly and automatically are filed with this court, passing an intermediate Court appeal, who hear civil and criminal cases.

Court of Appeal

Texas has 14 Court of Appeal, which has intermediate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases. The death penalty case, however, automatically appealed to the Texas Criminal Court of Appeal and thus missed the intermediate level in the appeals court hierarchy.

The total number of middle appeal seats is 80, with membership ranging from three to 13 judges per court, as required by law. All cases are heard by the three-justice panel unless a court hearing is ordered (unless a particular court has only three judges assigned to it, in which case all instances are automatically heard en banc ; for example, the 12th Appeal Court). The en banc process is used to maintain consistency within the jurisprudence of the court, to rule out existing precedents binding individual panels, and to set new precedents on unresolved legal questions or substantive procedures.

The Texas Legislature determines which districts belong to certain district courts of appeal, and has diverted the areas between courts to balance the map. The Texas Supreme Court seeks to balance the imbalance in continuous appeals with the equivalence appeals that provide the transfer of cases from the busiest appeals court to others with spare capacity.

In an oddity, two of the fourteen courts, the First and Fourteen, both sat in Harris County's 1910 historic courthouse in Houston, had concurrent jurisdiction over the same ten counties, the largest being Harris County. Parties seeking to appeal a case from a court of one of these countries are required to state in their appeal statement that they wish to appeal to the first or fourteenth appeal courts, and then have to wait and see where of the two they are assigned in a random. They will publicly receive notice from the designated courts informing them that they have not paid the $ 205 filing fee required to prosecute the appeal, and that their appeal may be dismissed if they do not do so within 20 days. View TEX. R. APP. P. 5 (requires payment of fees at the time of filing, unless excusable). This is a standard form letter submitted even though no one knows which court they will enter when they file an appeal notice. Notice must be filed in court, but payment must be made at the appeals court.

A more peculiar situation occurs in East and North Texas, where the Sixth Court has four districts - Gregg, Rusk, Upshur, and Wood - which overlap with the 12th Court, as well as Hunt County overlapping with the Fifth Tribunal.

District Courts

The Texas District Court is a court of law of general jurisdiction.

The district court has exclusive jurisdiction in cases of crimes, cases involving land rights, and election cases. It shares jurisdiction with the district court, and in some cases the peace court justice, for civil cases (the lowest limit for listening to cases is just $ 200 in controversy, while JP court can hear cases up to $ 10,000). The jurisdiction of family law varies depending on the existence of an in-law state court; in some districts, district courts share jurisdiction over divorce, child custody and support issues, adoption and child welfare cases with local courts in law. Also, the jurisdiction of the supreme judge varies depending on the whereabouts of the court of justice in the county. In some larger districts, such as Harris County, the district court is special, some family issues, others hear of criminal cases, and the third set hears non-family civil cases.

In rural areas, as many as five districts share district courts; urban districts, on the other hand, have many district courts, which in some cases specialize in civil, criminal, family, or children law.

One of the most unusual features of Texas court courts, including district courts, is the tradition of having only one judge per court. Instead of adding more departments to the existing courts in response to population growth, Texas added more courts. The result is that typical Texas urban courts are home to many single court trials, each of which is legally governed as a separate court with its own unique name and number. This is very different from the prevailing traditions in federal courts and courts in almost all US states, where courts can have many judges sitting in separate departments and all have the authority to act on behalf of the same court. While Texas law provides for certain specific circumstances in which a judge of a court may act for a judge to be absent from another court in the same jurisdiction, it is not flexible as it only treats all court judges as members of the same court (and in turn sometimes generate another basis for appeals).

This tradition has existed since the issuance of the Constitution of the Republic of Texas in 1836 by the newly born Republic. Part 2 of Article IV is provided for "no less than three or more than eight" judicial districts, and that "judges" shall be appointed to each district. A similar clause implies one judge per court appearing in all subsequent constitutions. For example, Section 7 of Article V of the state constitution 1876 is granted for 26 judicial districts, and that "judges" will be elected for each district. This problem was eventually corrected by the constitutional amendment in 1985, but the tradition of one judge per court at that time was entirely rooted.

However, some districts have established a centralized map system. In that system, cases are still assigned to certain courts and certain judges who preside over the court, but the movements and trials are assigned to judges on call-based calls based on consideration and availability of workload. This facilitates the use of more efficient judicial resources (judges and staff), but it makes the process less predictable for lawyers. In addition, verdicts in the same case are likely to be made by different judges as the case proceeds through the pretrial stage, and the hearing judges will be less familiar with the cases they face for the first time at the hearing.

In a country that uses such a system, lawyers know which judge will hear their movements and try the case (except when visiting judges are assigned to sit as absentee presiding judges), allowing experienced lawyers and law firms to assess the probability of outcome cases and thereby facilitating the settlement. In complex cases with multiple trials, the judge will become accustomed to the case and the lawyers demand it. On the other hand, the local court system in which the case remains with the same judge creates incentives for forum spending. To deflect it, Local Rules usually require random assignments to cases when they are first filed, and the redirection of cases filed after the nonsuit to court where the previous case was randomly assigned. The same applies to severance pay and other related cases.

Probate Courts

In another unique twist, the Constitution authorizes legislators to determine which courts deal with wills. Thus, in ten of the 15 largest countries (in particular, Bexar district, Collin, Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Galveston, Harris, Hidalgo, Tarrant, and Travis) the Legislature has established one or more Statutory Probate Courts. This special court handles issues of ratification, trust, trust and mental health. In some areas, courts of legal judges also hear cases of criticism. There is no jurisdictional monetary restriction on the types of lawsuits that the Supreme Court may hear. As such, their jurisdiction sometimes overlaps with the district court.

County Courts Constitution

Not to be confused with the District Courts in Law, made by law, there are District Courts for each of the 254 districts in Texas. The Texas Constitution states that "[t] here will be established in each county of this State of the District Court..." Sections 15 through 17 of Article V, as well as Chapters 25 and 26 of the Texas Government Code, describe the duties of these Courts and their officers.

Regional courts have exclusive jurisdiction over "Class A" and "Class B" violations (these violations may involve prison time), concurrent jurisdiction over civil cases where the amount in the controversy is moderate, and the jurisdiction of the JP court case and the municipality (for in the case of a city court, this may involve a court of de novo if the lower court is not a "court of record").

District court judges are not required to be licensed lawyers. Because of this, defendants in areas with only traditional constitutional courts may request that their cases be transferred to the district district court for trial if the district judge approves [1]. However, defendants in areas with regional courts in the legal structure do not have this option, because the district court in the judge of law must have a law degree.

Section 15 states that County Courts will be "court records". Section 16 states that the County Courts "have jurisdiction as prescribed by law"; Section 17 states that the County Courts shall have provisions as provided by law and that a District Court Judge shall consist of six persons, but in the case of a civil jury shall not be sanctified unless one of the parties sue him and pay the jury fee or a written statement file stating that he can do it.

Because the district judge is also responsible for leading the Commissioners of the Commission (the main regional legislative and executive branch), in 94 counties, the Texas Legislature has established a district court in law to free the district judge from judicial duty. The first multi-county county courts (comprising the county of Fisher, Mitchell, and Nolan) were created in 2013. In most areas with jurisdiction in law, civil and criminal jurisdiction of constitutional state courts has been transferred to local courts in law. Unlike local judges, the district court judge must be a lawyer. District courts in law may hear civil and criminal matters, or hear them separately, depending on how the Legislature has compiled them (Dallas, Denton, El Paso, Harris, and Tarrant districts have "regional criminal courts" or "regional criminal courts in law" who only heard of criminal cases).

Statutory County Courts at Law

The District Courts in the Law, not to be confused with the Constitutional District Courts, generally have wider jurisdiction than constitutional state courts. The Statutory District Court can generally file a lawsuit in which the amount of controversy is over $ 500 but not more than $ 200,000. However, unlike constitutional state courts, the jurisdiction of the Statutory District Court may vary from one country to another. For example, in Dallas County, the Statutory District Court has jurisdiction almost as wide as the District Court. In Harris County, the genus jurisdiction cap is $ 200,000 but this court also has the exclusive jurisdiction of a leading domain process regardless of the amount in the controversy. In Travis County, the amount in controversy for Statutory County Court matters can be entertaining ranges from $ 500 to $ 250,000. There is no clear policy reason for the various jurisdictions of the Statutory District Court.

Municipal Court

Under the authority granted by Part 1 of Article V, the Legislature has allowed the establishment of city courts in every city entered in Texas, with the consent of the electorate creating the court. Chapters 29 and 30 of the Texas Government Code outline the duties of this Court and their officers.

The municipal court in Texas came in contact with more defendants than any other Texas tribunal combined. Subjects of municipal courts are related to crimes related to public safety and quality of life issues. In recent years, municipal courts and courts have become the main venue for child abuse abuses.

Within the city limits, these courts have shared jurisdiction with the JP court in cases of Class C criminal violations, and have exclusive jurisdiction in cases involving municipal regulations. The municipal court has limited civil jurisdiction over public matters relating to public safety (eg, the determination of dangerous dogs). The confusion surrounding the civil jurisdiction of the state court is complicated that if the city court is a "court of record," the Legislature has authorized the city to adopt an ordinance that gives the city court a concurrent jurisdiction over substandard development cases with the district and/or district courts. The issue of civil jurisdiction is increasingly confused by the emergence of civil penalties for behavior that can be prosecuted as a Class C violation (eg, certain parking violations, infringement of red light cameras).

As a general rule, city courts are not "court records" (ie, no court reporter records and transcribes the process), and thus appeals to the district level will require a new trial (ie, trial de novo ). This proved to be a gap for some of the defendants in traffic cases, who betrayed officers who could not attend, and thus had a case rejected. In addition, the de novo courts crowded the docks of local courts already busy in the field of law. Many major cities - such as in Austin, El Paso, Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio - have chosen to turn the municipal court into court (this also requires voter approval) to close this gap.

Cases of municipal courts generally appeal to the county court level, but can not appeal beyond that level unless the fine is more than $ 100 or constitutional issue is declared.

Justice of the Peace Courts

The lowest court rate in Texas is the Peace Court (also called the Court of Justice or the JP Court). Each region has at least one JP Court. Sections 18 and 19 of Article V, and Chapters 27 and 28 of the Texas Government Code, describe the duties of this Court and their officers.

Section 19 establishes JP's minimum court jurisdiction:

• Original jurisdiction in "criminal matters of minor offense cases punishable by fines only" (called "Class C" minor offense under the Texas Penal Code),
• exclusive jurisdiction in "civil issues where the number of controversies is $ 200 or less", and
• "Other jurisdictions that may be provided by law". Under this provision, the Legislature has raised the upper limit on civil matters to $ 10,000 and assigned the JP court, among others, the right to hear cases involving evictions as well as cases involving foreclosures and liens against private property in which the amount it falls within the JP (jurisdiction) jurisdiction of the Court. In addition, marriage certificates are obtained through JP offices, and JP is also legally allowed to conduct a wedding ceremony.

JP cases were filed to the district court where the case resulted in the de novo trial. The appeal perfection clears the judgment of the JP court, which means that the higher court does not reverse or affirm the JP court when finalizing the appeal. The case is even tried again on appeal, but the jurisdiction of the JP court, not the courts, is valid. Appeals from JP courts also differ from appeals to appeals courts because they require the posting of bonds. This makes such a request more severe for the defendant's loss than an appeal from a district court to an appeals court unless the defendant is entitled to continue in a pauperis forma.

In criminal cases, cases that are initiated in court can not be tried outside the district court unless the fine is more than $ 100 or constitutional matters are declared.

Based on Section 18, the number of JP (and related constables; each area has many cops as JP) depends on the size of the county:

• For districts with populations less than 18,000 (as determined by the census), all districts will be one area of ​​the police station, unless the Court of Commissioners decides that more is needed, in which case the court may divide the area. to no more than four JP areas.
• For areas with a population of at least 18,000 but less than 50,000, JP's district count should be not less than two or more than eight.
• For areas with a population of 50,000 or greater, the district of JP must be no less than four or more than eight.
• In any area with a population of less than 150,000, if there is a police station containing a town with a population of 18,000 or more, the police station will have two JP offices.
• In any country with a population of 150,000 or greater, each JP police station may have more than one JP.
• Special provisions apply to Chambers and Randall County (must have no less than two or more than six territories) and to Mills, Reagan, and Roberts (the police station is abolished, with the Sheriff's office doing all the work).

src: c8.alamy.com

Administration

The Texas Supreme Court has constitutional responsibility for the efficient administration of the judicial system and has the authority to make administrative rules applicable to the courts in addition to promulgation and amend the rules governing court proceedings and court appeals, and the rules of evidence. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of the Criminal Court judges, respective judges of 14 appeals courts, and judges from each court of the court are generally responsible for the administration of their respective courts.

There are local administrative district judges in each region, as well as local district court judges in each county with a district court. In a district with two or more district courts, a local administrative district judge shall be elected by a district judge in the region for a period of not more than two years; in a district with two or more judicial state courts, a local administrative court judge shall be elected by a district court judge for a period not exceeding two years. Local administrative judges are assigned to apply local administrative rules, oversee the rapid movement of court burdens, and other administrative duties.

eFileTexas.gov is an official electronic filing system (e-filing). Each region maintains (or does not maintain) its own map management and retrieval system, similar to PACER for the federal government. No more officially published reporters. West's Texas Cases (Texas version of South Western Reporter ) includes reported opinions about the Supreme Court, Criminal Court of Appeal and Court of Appeals. The Texas Reports included Supreme Court opinions until July 1962, and Texas Crime Report including the opinion of the Court of Appeal until November 1962. There was no systematic reporting of court proceedings.. Court opinions are generally freely accessible on the web from various court websites, with appeals generally available from 1997 to 2002 and beyond.

By 2014, the Texas Court of Appeals website is updated and migrated to a new web address (with automatic forwarding from the old URL). Each court website allows for case and opinion searches using different types of inputs in addition to causing numbers, such as party names, attorney's name, attorney's lawyer number, date/date range of files, and full-text search using key words. All current opinions are now released as pdf documents, not html, and thus the standard, although different courts use different templates and citation styles/footnoting, which create some degree of variation in appearance. In addition, the appellate court now also makes procedural orders, briefs, and movements available online.

Appeals are also available through Google Scholar. Google Scholar presents it in an easier format for online viewing (compared to double-spaced libraries in small fonts released by the court), cited hotlinks, and provides other functions, such as the identification of subsequent citation cases and search result rankings by relevance or time (paupers) and search deadlines. The Google Scholar version also includes lawyer information for each case that was decided, but did not (in May 2018) provide a hotlink to the appeal tray, which would be a very useful additional feature. Google instead uses heat-related internal cause numbers to connect opinions in cases with procedural orders issued in the same case that are also included in its database.

The Texas Judicial Council is the main policy-making body for the judiciary. Responsible for studying and recommending changes to improve the administration of justice. The Administrative Director of the Court Administration Office serves as the Executive Director for the Board.

The Texas District Court Administration provides information and research, technology services, budget and legal support, and other administrative assistance to various branches of courts and courts, under the supervision of the Texas Supreme Court and Supreme Court Justices. The office is headed by an Administrative Director appointed by the Supreme Court and reports to the Supreme Court.

The State Bar of Texas (Texas Bar) is a judicial institution under the administrative control of the Texas Supreme Court. The Texas Bar is responsible for assisting the Texas Supreme Court in overseeing all lawyers licensed to practice law in Texas.

src: c7.alamy.com

Officer

Judge, Judicial Elections, and Judicial Success

In Texas, state judges are elected in partisan elections. Trial judges were elected for 4 years, and court appeal judges were elected for 6 years. The governor fills vacancies until the next election, and judges have traditionally left the office before their last term is over. The early resignation followed by the appointment of the governor of his successor is now part of a well-established judicial election practice in Texas. It serves as the mechanism by which the ruling party at the state level seeks to ensure the replacement of the petahana with a substitute for the same party, which then opposes the election as a petahana. It does not always work. All elective positions in the executive and judicial branches are controlled by the Republicans because the country as a whole is a solid red. However, appellate court judges and courts are elected from the districts, and some districts are more competitive than the state as a whole, and some even have a clear majority of Democrats.

There are other scenarios that can produce substitutions on the bench, but are rare. Judges may be deleted by voters in retention elections, by court by jury, or by legislative address or impeachment if a state judge. The main source of change in the composition of the judiciary involves politics.

Some of the incumbent judges seeking re-election lost the primary election, others in the general election. The probability of turnover triggered by elections on the district bench and the appeal is influenced by the nature of concurrent (presidential or middle-term) elections and by partisan tides, at least in more competitive districts and district appeals, such as Dallas and Harris County/Houston (county level) and San Antonio (district level appeal).

In 2006, several dozen Republican candidates were swept from their bleachers by Democrats in Dallas County, and in 2008, many petitions were lost in Harris County. But there is a solution to the "problem" of the judge changing hands to the wishes of the electorate: The governor has the authority to fill the void, and has used that authority to bring back the elected judge of the Republic from office. Additional slots and reappointment opportunities can, and be made, when the Governor fills vacancies in a higher court with judges sitting in lower courts.

District court judges are required to become licensed lawyers. In addition to the judicial powers, district judges also have administrative duties. District judges may remove local officials [2], officials from municipal law [3], and city court judges [4] under certain circumstances. Also, they appoint and supervise local auditors, oversee the operations of adult and juvenile offices, and are granted "supervisory" jurisdiction over the district commissioner's courts.

The county judge does not need to be a lawyer, and most do not. Parts 15 through 17 of Article V, as well as Chapters 25 and 26 of the Texas Government Code, describe the duties of the District Court officials. Section 15 states that the county judge must be "well informed in the laws of the State", "a conservator of peace", and shall be elected for a term of four years. The district judge is also responsible for leading the Commissioner's Tribunal (the main executive and legislative body in the region). The district court at the judge should be a lawyer.

In one strange provision of the Texas Government Code, there is no requirement that a city judge be a lawyer if a city court is not a court of record (Chapter 29, Section 29.004), but a city judge must be a licensed attorney with at least two years experience in practicing Texas law if the court the city is a court of record (Chapter 30, Section 30.00006). This code provides different requirements for city judges in certain cities, such as:

• Lubbock (five years experience, Section 30.00044)
• El Paso (providing the presiding judge for 20% over other judges, Section 30.00128)
• San Antonio (must have been living in town for three years prior to appointment, Section 30.00224)
• Wichita Falls (no need to be a city resident when appointed but must be a resident during his term of office, Section 30.00304),
• Sweetwater (just need to be a licensed attorney with a good reputation, Section 30.00464)
• Lewisville ("will devote as much time as possible to the office as it requires", Section 30.01326)
• Houston ("may only be deleted under Article V, Section 1-a, Texas Constitution", Section 30.00674)
• Bullard (requirement to become a licensed lawyer does not apply, Section 30.01482)
Westlake and Trophy Club (both cities are located in Tarrant and Denton counties; for Westlake criminal appeals are brought to Tarrant County Courts in Law, whereas for Trophy Club criminal appeals are brought to Denton District Court in Law, Sections 30.01781 and 30.01811) li>

The Texas State Commission for Judicial Conduct of thirteen people hears complaints against judges, and can denounce, reprimand, or recommend dismissal by the Supreme Court. Very rarely punish the judge; of the more than 1,110 complaints completed in fiscal year 2009, only 70 disciplinary measures were taken.

Judge of Peace

There is no requirement that JP become a lawyer. However, the Texas Government Code requires JP to attend an 80-hour course involving the execution of the JP duties within a year of the initial election, and the course 20 hours every year thereafter. In addition, JP is an ex officio notary.

Magistrat

A "judge" may be a judge or JP and may arrange for bonds, prosecute defendants, search for issues and arrest warrants, and conduct criminal penalties for hearing. Five districts (Bexar, Dallas, Lubbock, Tarrant, and Travis) have district court judges appointed by district court judges and do not hold trials.

Attorney

There are several prosecutor's offices: district attorneys, local lawyers, criminal district lawyers, and city attorneys. District attorneys try criminal cases in the district courts and serve one or more districts where they are elected for a four-year term. District prosecutors adjudicate criminal offenses and serve an area where they are elected for a four-year term. District criminal lawyers try criminal and criminal offenses and serve an area where they are elected for a four-year term. City lawyers try criminal cases in city courts. If an area has only a district attorney or district attorney, this official demands all criminal cases in the area.

src: c8.alamy.com

See also

• The Government of Texas
• Texas Law
• Law enforcement in Texas

src: c8.alamy.com

References

src: f4.bcbits.com

External links

• eFileTexas.gov

Source of the article : Wikipedia