Why are you seeking this bench and what 3 primary goals do you have in mind if you are elected?
I decided it was time to step into the fight. After practicing law for 34 years, doing more than 140 jury trials (criminal and civil), more than 117 appeals, including appeals to the Texas and United States Supreme Court, I think I have the broad-based civil, family and criminal law experience to exercise sound judgment, based upon conservative principles, in cases appealed to the 9th Court of Appeals. This Appeals Court considers all civil, family and criminal law cases appealed from the trial courts in its 10-County division. Goals: 1. instill an "originalist" approach to constitutional and statutory construction advocated by Judges such as Antonin Scalia; 2. Issue judgments based upon clearly identified statutory or constitutional authorities without interjecting personal biases or opinions; and 3. Efficient and speedy decision-making.
To what extent do you believe the state or federal government should be able to obtain court orders directing parents to do things for their children that the parent does not believe should be done?
Children have the same "right to life" whether in the womb or 17 years and 11 months later. The State and Federal government should not interfere with a parent's God-given right to bring their child up in the manor that parent sees fit. The government should only be allowed to get involved when failing to take action would result in death or serious, permanent harm to a child is being perpetrated by the parent, or another person at the allowance of the parent. For example, a parent who is sexually abusing a child, or allowing someone else to, is permanently harming that child either physically or mentally, or both. The government should step in. However, a parent who believes in home schooling their child, or waiving off on the option to vaccinate their child, should not have their decisions second-guessed by a government bureaucrat.
What carries the greatest influence on your rulings: case law, the Constitutions, or other?
The original intent of the drafters of the Constitution, or legislation, should have the most important influence on court rulings because courts should not be making legislation from the bench. When an issue arises, the court should rely upon previous decisions involving the same issues if the precedent is consistent with the original intent of the drafters of either the Constitutional provision at issue, or the statute at issue (the doctrine of Stare Decisis). This provides some level of certainty to attorneys and lower courts on points of law that come up at the trial level. On the other hand, some previous decisions did not follow the original intent of the drafters, such as the Dred Scott ruling that concluded African-Americans did not have the same constitutional rights as other Americans, and after many decades it was properly reversed. Never should a court rely on authorities from other countries to decide an issue regarding the U.S. or Texas Constitutions or laws. The American legal jurisprudence is based upon "Natural Law" which says individuals have natural, God-given rights that cannot be taken away by government--a concept that is not present in other Western nations.
Are the United States and Texas constitutions living documents? Please answer in the context of Progressivism versus Originalism.
Absolutely not. I was lied to in Law School when my constitutional law Professor (Rotenberg) told us that the constitution was an "organic, living document who's meaning was subject to change with the changing times." I didn't realize until I read David Barton's book, called "Original Intent," in the late 1990's that the original intent of the Founders was clearly set forth in founding documents and early case law--case law that was not taught in Law School! Since that time, I've had the benefit of writings by Edwin Meese (recommended to me by a speaker from The Heritage Foundation) and by Mark Levin's series of books regarding the attempts to destroy the original intent of our Judeo-Christian Founders. Levin points out, in "Ameritopia" and his other writings, that the Progressive movement was brought to America in the late 1800's from German Schools of Philosphy and Political Science. Their theories rejected the primarily American belief in the sacredness of individual liberty and property rights as God-given rights. They were influenced by Darwinian ideas rooted in an agnostic approach to society which led them to a "collective" approach and view of societal rights and duties. These ideas must be vanquished from our jurisprudence.
Please list the key differences between you & your opponent(s) in this race & why your experience/position is better.
This is a Court of Appeals. Over the last 34 years I have worked on more that 117 appeals of record (when I prosecuted in Nueces County, I did dozens of appeals under the name of my boss, Carlos Valdez, which did not carry my name). This number is at least 30 more appeals than my nearest opponent, and many more than the others. I've done both civil and criminal appeals, in multiple Texas courts of appeals, as wells as the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals and in the Texas and United States Supreme Courts. I know trial work. I've done more than 140 criminal and civil jury trials and hundreds of nonjury family and civil trials. I've helped people start-up their small businesses with the correct legal paperwork and I've represented small business people when they have been wrongfully sued and need help dealing with the courts. I've done will contests and probate work to help people with their most difficult times in life--the loss of a loved one. Most important of all, I have pursued and taught people about conservative principles by being volunteer legal counsel for the Montgomery County Conservative Coalition, the Montgomery County TEA Party, and the Montgomery County Republican Party.
Please describe the best way for the average voter to determine which judicial candidate is best.
Ask them their judicial philosophy. Is the Constitution an "organic, living document subject to interpretation by learned Appeals Court Judges"? If they say yes, run away as far and as fast as you can because this is the problem with our appellate Court system now. Is the candidate afraid to be, or say, he/she is "pro-life"? We need judges who are not afraid to uphold the Judeo-Christian values upon which our legal system is based. If the people we elect do not believe in and seek to uphold these values, our Country is no more. If a candidate doesn't know how he/she stands on these basic issues, then he/she is not ready to take the bench. What kind of work has the attorney done? Check with other attorneys who might know the candidate to see how he/she performs his/her job.
What role should government have in reforming criminals?
There are 3 theories of punishment: 1. Retribution. This is from the Old Testament (eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth). The court fines or imprisons a defendant to satisfy the desires of the victim or their family. Some consider the death penalty for capital murder to constitute retribution. So be it.
2. General and Specific Deterrent. To achieve General Deterrence, the Court issues a sentence that will deter people in society who are likely to engage in the same criminal behavior by making an example out of a defendant with the sentence. To achieve Specific Deterrence, the Court issues a sentence tailored to the particular defendant sufficient to deter that particular individual from engaging in the same or similar behavior in the future. This is usally accomplished by a combination of jail and/or probation with restitution and a fine. Conditions include prohibiting the use of alcohol and drugs. There are also programs in Texas prisons to help modify the behavior of the defendant to prepare him/her for life on parole that will prevent re-offending.
3. Rehabilitation. This theory has come into favor with non-violent offenders, typically drug offenders, and results in a sentence that involves drug treatment and counseling, cognition therapy (used in Drug Court to change a person's response to addictive stimulations), community service and restitution with the goal of returning the defendant to society as a productive, responsible, law-abiding tax-payer. All theories should be considered in sentencing for a judge to determine where the government will get the best results for the least amount of money.
Please describe what you believe are the most significant issues in this race, why and what you'll do to address them?
The most significant issues in this race are the candidate's commitment to and understanding of "originalist" jurisprudence, and the breadth and depth of experience the candidate has that can be applied to all of the various types of cases that come before the Appeals Court for consideration. The original intent of the drafters of the Constitution, or statute at issue, is paramount. Any candidate for this office needs to commit to consider the original intent of the Legislature, or Constitutional Convention that adopted the Constitutional provision in question, so as to avoid basing interpretations of laws or provisions of the Constitution (State or Federal), on his/her personal opinions or beliefs as was done in the Obergefel v. Hodges case which created an "implied" constitutional right to same-sex marriage. This was also done when the Supreme Court created a "privacy" right in Griswold v. Connecticut to strike down all state laws restricting contraception and was later used to create an "implied" constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. These "implied" rights did not exist in the Constitution because the issues about marriage and family were left to the State under the 10th Amendment. We need a candidate with the experience and understanding of these concepts and the determination to see them implemented in the face of popular culture and pressures in the same way Justices Scalia and Thomas have argued so eloquently in their Opinions. The left is at war with us and I want to fight back!
Please describe the qualifications and experience that make you the best candidate for the office you are seeking.
QUALIFICATIONS: Licensed to practice law November 8, 1985, Texas Supreme Court; since March 1986 in U.S. District Court (includes Bankruptcy), Southern District of Texas; since 1998 in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals; and since November 2004 in the United States Supreme Court. EDUCATION: Doctor of Jurisprudence 1985, University of Houston Law School. B.A. in Political Science 1982, Corpus Christi State University (now Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi, Texas). 34 years of continuous practice.
EXPERIENCE: Assistant Nueces County Attorney, March, 1986-January, 1993. Chief of Civil Division from August 1990-December 1992. Chief of Criminal Division from May, 1988-July, 1990. Trial Prosecutor from March, 1986-April, 1988. As Division Chief I supervised the attorneys and staff and tried the high-profile or difficult cases for the Office which included Attempted Capital Murder by Juvenile, Obscenity cases, and DWIs with serious injuries.
PRIVATE PRACTICE: After leaving the prosecutor's office, I entered private practice and have worked in the following areas: Civil litigation (State and Federal), Family and Juvenile law, CPS cases, employment law, contract cases, criminal defense, bankruptcy, small business formation and litigation, wills and probate, and appeals (civil and criminal cases in State and Federal appellate Courts). I have had more than 117 Texas Appeals Court cases, more than 140 jury trials and hundreds of family and civil non-jury trials. In addition to more than 117 State Appeals Court cases, I have also been Appellant/Petitioner or Appellee/Respondent on appeals with the Texas Supreme Court, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 5th Circuit federal Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. Some appeals were of cases I handled at the trial level and some appeals I was retained or appointed after the trial.
Please describe the changes you will make to improve the efficiency of your court, yet remain thoughful about rulings/orders - that allows all parties to be heard and their arguments considered. Please specifically address how many days a year your court will be “in session.”
With electronic "e-filing" of documents now, the Court of Appeals is accessible 24 hours a day. Appeals Courts do not take testimony in open Court like trial courts. All appeals and filings are submitted in writing and then reviewed by the Court. If elected Chief Justice, I will endeavor to allow more parties to conduct an oral argument on their case, if they desire it, because I believe Justices will more thoroughly review the evidence in the record if they know they will be discussing the case at an oral argument. I have had oral arguments in other Courts of Appeals (not the 9th District) where the Justices asked question indicating they were not aware of major fact and issues in the record or briefs of the case. Example, my client was allowed to return to work the week before summary judgment was granted, both parties wrote that in their briefs, and the Justices thought my client had never been returned to his job until I mentioned it in my opening argument. When that happens, it undermines the confidence of the attorneys and litigants they there case is being a serious review and consideration.
Among the nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court(SCOTUS), which one do you respect the most, and why? Which one do you respect the least, and why? What judicial philosophy should a SCOTUS Justice have?
Of the Justices we have right now, Justice Thomas is the one I respect the most. Not only because of his life story (he has a fascinating biography), but because he understands the history surrounding our Constitution, the establishment of our form of government, so much so that he can bring forward those original ideas and purposes and apply them to today's circumstances when issues are brought to the Supreme Court. He is carrying the baton dropped by Justice Scalia for the originalists on the Court and I think he does a better job of it than Chief Justice Roberts. He is not afraid to speak the truth.
I least respect Ruth Bader Ginsburg who, outrageously, went to Egypt when they were re-writing their constitution and advised them not to use the American Constitution as their model. She was recommending that they use a socialist model which would lock them into a socialist/communist authoritarian system of government. More disturbing, she completely rejects the truth of "natural law" which says that our basic Constitutional rights are given to us from God--no matter what Congress or the President says or orders. Her way of thinking is currently in the majority and is destroying the foundations of America.
Do you think judges should be elected by the people, or appointed by a commission?
Elected by the people and in partisan races. Judges work in very private arenas--the Open Meetings and Open Records Acts do not apply to judicial deliberations! When judges are apointed, only the appointer knows all the reasons why that person became the judge. There can be ulterior motives suspected. As unpleasant as judicial elections can be, at least the people will have more knowledge about the person and their political leanings and beliefs than people would know if they are appointed by a Governor or a Board.
What amount of indigent defense is appropriate for the State/Montgomery County? And why?
The Supreme Court has written extensively about the requirement that indigent persons are entitled to a minimum level of representation sufficient to keep innocent people from being convicted of crimes they didn't commit. After becoming the major County with the highest percentage of defendants receiving court-appointed attorneys, the Board of Judges tightened the review and began running credit reports to determine whether the party applying was truly indigent. That resulted in a drastic reduction of court appointments. Unfortunately, capital murder cases are impacting the budget for court-appointed attorney's fees and these cases, when they happen, make it difficult to keep a lid on the number of routine court-appointed cases that are fairly stable from year to year. The current county system is much cheaper than it would be if a "Public Defender's Office" were established as a permanent County bureaucracy. Using the contract system has saved money by paying court-appointed attorneys a set monthly fee no matter how much time they spend on a case. As long as Supreme Court mandates come down, the County will have to provide the funding.
CSPOA says "Civil forfeiture laws pose one of the greatest threats to property rights in the nation today. They encourage law enforcement to favor the pursuit of property over the pursuit of justice, and they typically give the innocent little recourse for recovering seized property. And without meaningful transparency, law enforcement faces little public accountability for its forfeiture activity or expenditures from forfeiture funds." How should these Civil Forfieture issues be addressed?
First of all, all forfeited funds should be turned over to the governmental entity's "General Fund" to relieve the burden of the taxpayers. The Commissioners, or a City Council, or controlling entity should decide how much of the seized funds will go back to the agency, or agencies in the task force, who seized the property. When I worked for the Nueces County Attorney, my boss obtained Commissioner's Court Approval for all expenditures from seized funds even though it was not required by law. It should be. The old law encouraged the "reverse buy" scenario in which law enforcement would arrange to sell the drugs to the "dealer" so the "dealer" so the "dealer" would show up with the bag full of money. Easy, previously seized drugs were used as the decoy and the Agency, or Agencies participating in the Task Force, all got a payday. The motive to seize cash and expensive properties is reduced when Law Enforcement knows they will not be using the money to by helicopters, fancy undercover cars, or for unnecessary out-of-town Seminars. The Timbs v. Indiana case, decided by the Supreme Court this year, has properly placed a road-block on excessive civil forfeitures as violative of the 8th Amendment's proscription against excessive fines. Clearly, innocent people who did not have knowledge of a crime should not have their property taken away and the Legislature needs to address this.
Understanding that all courts in MoCo have general jurisdiction, the board of judges has moved towards specialized courts. What types of cases are currently filed in the court you are running for? What is your experiences to handle this specific case type? Are you planning on asking to change the case allocation or case type assigned to the court you are running for if you win?
The 9th Court of Appeals handles appeals of all civil, family, criminal, probate, and any other lawsuits tried in County or District Court. Therefore, this action is not a possibility with this Court. That is why my broad experience with virtually every category of case this Court deals with makes me a great fit for this position when you review my experience shown by my answer to one of the previous questions.
In your view, what is the threshold for determining constitutionality of a legislative act? or a challenge to it?
Legislative Committees which draft legislation have attorneys who research and write opinions as to the constitutionality of proposed legislation. That is one practical reason that Legislative Acts are presumed to be constitutional. However, sometimes those opinions have not anticipated all possible circumstances in the application of the law and someone brings a challenge to the law based upon a constitutional claim. Working with a presumption of constitutionality, an appellate court should review the opinions of higher courts (Supreme Court for civil cases, Court of Criminal Appeals for criminal cases), or other equal Texas courts, to see if there are existing well-reasoned opinions on cases deciding the same issue. If none exist, the Court should research the Legislative History of the statute to discover the reason the Legislature passed the statute, or how it has amended it and follow the reasoning of the Legislature. As a last resort, other review having failed to determine Legislative intent, the court should explain in clear and concise language and by what authority the law so violates the Constitution. No personal beliefs or opinions such as Potter Stewart's opinion on obscenity: "I know it when I see it."
Please list civic, political or union organization or individuals to whom you have contributed (five years):
Donald Trump for President, Montgomey County Republican Party, Texas Republican Party, National Republican Party, Ted Cruz for President and Senate, Montgomey County Tea Party PAC, PACN Montgomery County, Montgomery County Eagle Forum, Montgomery County Right to Life, Dan Crenshaw, Devin Nunez, Thomas More Society, American Center for Law and Justice, Knights of Columbus Iraqi Refugee Fund, Judge Jack Pulcher, Judge Kristin Bays, Judge Tracy Gilbert, Judge Mark Keough, Judge Sheri Dean, Jon Bouche, Bob Bagley, JoAnn Linzer, Walter Cooke, Montgomery County Bar Association (Margaret's Fund), many others I can't recall at this time.
Please list all conservative groups for which you are or have been a member, and list any positions held in each group.
When we lived in Corpus Christi, we were members of Eagle Forum, Nueces County Republican Party, CC Right to Life, and Corpus Christi Taxpayers Association. Since moving to Conroe in 2001, we joined Montgomery County Repbulican Party, in 2009, Conservative Coalition of Montgomery County (volunteer lawyer), in 2009, Montgomery County Eagle Forum, in 2011 when it began, Montgomery County Tea Party (volunteer lawyer), Montgomery County Republican Party (volunteer General Counsel 2018-2019).
Please list who is endorsing you and what their relationship to you is?
My wife, Beverly, has endorsed me and that's the most important endorsement! Other than that, I have not yet sought or received any endorsements. I will be activating a website for the campaign which will gather endorsements.
You are asking for the Republican nomination, what have you done to give back to the GOP?
I have been active in the Republican Party since 1982. I attended local and State Conventions in 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1994, 2008, 2010, called on phone banks, block-walked, and have contributed to the Party or Republican campaigns since that time. During the Obama years, I decided to focus more on supporting conservative, local Republican candidates and concentrate less on State and National Campaigns.
