Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
IN RE COMMITMENT OF RICHARD HAUBOIS
On Appeal from the 435th District Court
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 07-09-08953 CV
In an appeal from an order entered in a sexually-violent-predator proceeding,
we are asked to address whether we possess appellate jurisdiction over an order
changing the entity that approves where Richard Haubois is required to reside. We
conclude that the trial courtâ€™s order is not appealable, and we also conclude that
mandamus relief on the issues Haubois raises is not warranted. Accordingly, we
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Recently, in In re Commitment of Holt and In re Commitment of Cortez, we
addressed the same issues Haubois raises in his brief, and we concluded that we
did not have appellate jurisdiction over these same issues. In re Commitment of
Holt, No. 09-12-00406-CV, 2013 WL ______, at *__ (Tex. App.â€”Beaumont July
11, 2013, no pet. h.); In re Commitment of Cortez, No. 09-12-00385-CV, 2013 WL
3270613, at *2 (Tex. App.â€”Beaumont June 27, 2013, no pet. h.). We also
considered whether Holt and Cortez raised issues entitling them to mandamus
relief. See Holt, 2013 WL _______, at *__; Cortez, 2013 WL 3270613, at **2-6.
For the same reasons stated in Holt and Cortez, we conclude that we lack
appellate jurisdiction to review the trial courtâ€™s order dated July 26, 2012, and that
Haubois has not demonstrated that he should receive mandamus relief.
Accordingly, we dismiss Hauboisâ€™s appeal.
Submitted on July 10, 2013
Opinion Delivered August 15, 2013
Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.