Ex Parte Alfred SmithAppeal from 57th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00089-CV EX PARTE Alfred SMITH Original Habeas Corpus Proceeding 1 PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: February 19, 2014 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DENIED On February 7, 2014, relator Alfred Smith filed an original pro se habeas corpus proceeding. Relator alleges that he has been illegally confined to county jail after being held in contempt for failure to pay previously ordered child support. Relator provides numerous grounds upon which he believes he is entitled to habeas corpus relief and seeks to be released from custody. However, it is relator s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish his right to habeas corpus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1)(D) (if a writ of habeas corpus is sought, relator must include in the appendix proof that the relator is being restrained); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a)(1)-(2) (a relator must file with the petition: (1) a certified or sworn copy of every document that is material to the relator s claim for relief and that was filed in any underlying 1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2004-CI-16569, styled Alfred Smith v. Partrena B. Smith, pending in the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Nick Catoe Jr. presiding. 04-14-00089-CV proceeding; and (2) a properly authenticated transcript of any relevant testimony from any underlying proceeding ); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Relator has failed to provide us with a record to support his claims such as the order complained of, proof of restraint, or the reporter s record from the hearing. Accordingly, relator s petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. PER CURIAM -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.