In Re: Elizabeth ThurmanAppeal from County Court at Law of Cherokee County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-13-00296-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS IN RE: § ELIZABETH THURMAN, § RELATOR § ORIGINAL PROCEEDING MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM On September 25, 2013, Relator, Elizabeth Thurman, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in which she alleges that she is being unlawfully confined in the Cherokee County Jail pursuant to a void contempt order. Based upon the grounds stated in her petition, she seeks to be released from custody. In an original habeas proceeding, the relator has the burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish her right to habeas corpus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k)(1), 52.7(a); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). Here, however, Thurman has failed to provide us with a record that is sufficient to support her claims. 1 Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Opinion delivered October 31, 2013. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J. (PUBLISH) 1 On the date the petition was filed, the court sent Thurman a letter notifying her of the deficiencies. COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT OCTOBER 31, 2013 NO. 12-13-00296-CV IN RE: ELIZABETH THURMAN, RELATOR ORIGINAL PROCEEDING ON THIS DAY came to be heard the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by Relator, ELIZABETH THURMAN, who is the Respondent in Cause No. 2012-01-0001, styled In the Interest of Hannah Dianne Thurman, Allissa Mae Thurman, and Kyle Wain Thurman, Children, pending on the docket of the County Court at Law of Cherokee County, Texas. Said petition for writ of habeas corpus having been filed herein on September 25, 2013, and the same having been duly considered, because it is the opinion of this court that a writ of habeas corpus should not issue, it is therefore CONSIDERED, ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the said petition for writ of habeas corpus be, and the same is here by denied. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
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.
