Please describe what you believe are the most significant issues in this race and why.

I believe that its important for anyone looking at this race to not just look at the candidates, but to look at the entire make-up of the Court of Criminal Appeals as a whole. For example, if my opponent, Sid Harle, were to be elected, he would be the Fourth San Antonio Republican elected to the court, almost giving the San Antonio group of judges a majority (just one judge short).

Another issue is my opponents consideration to become a democrat. In 2013 he gave an interview to the San Antonio Express saying that he was considering becoming a Democrat to run for, DA, but it may not be in his best interest (quote below). First, as a true Conservative, my answer would be “No” to a request to switch parties, AND, shouldn’t we be concerned about what is best for the State of Texas, instead of what’s best for our own political career? 

Are the United States and Texas constitutions living documents?  Please answer in the context of Progressivism versus Originalism.   

No, I believe you should apply the original intent and not find new meaning that did not exist when it was enacted. The only way to make those changes to the Constitutions should be through the democratic process enacted within our laws.

Please describe the best way for the average voter to determine which candidate for this office is best.

It comes down to asking these questions:
Have they said things contrary to conservative values? (One of my opponents considered becoming a Democrat). Are they experienced in Criminal law? (I have very diverse, deep experience) What have they spent their time on outside of work (My wife and I have donated many hours to the Pro-life movement and to our church). How do they spend their money? (We consistently tithe to our church, give to missions, donate to pro-life groups and pregnancy resource centers, and we live on a budget as a family, drive used cars and are fiscally responsible) What level of involvement with the Party has the candidate exhibited? (I’ve been a delegate to the Republican State Convention since I could vote, and a volunteer before that. I’ve also worked on Republican campaigns and worked for Republican elected officials.)

How many days off per year should the officeholder of this position take to learn (seminars & workshops) or teach (give educational or motivational talks) or network with other county officials?

I think continuing legal education is important, but it should not be abused. Two to three conferences a year is normal. I think its important that a judge keeps his docket up to speed and not backlogged, and that would be the true testament to how hard that judge is working. If they have a backlog...something is wrong.

Who is endorsing you and what is their relationship to you?

Judge Paul Pressler (friend), Harris County District Clerk Chris Daniel (friend), Cathie Adams (Texas Eagle Forum), and currently waiting on some more that I will hopefully get the coming week!

Why are you running for this office and what 3 major goals do you want to be measured by if you are elected?

1. How strongly did I protect the rights given to us by the First Amendment? Unfortunately many group seek to criminalize speech, religious practice, freedom of association, and its important that we have judges that will protect those rights.
2. How strongly did I protect the rights given to us by the Second Amendment? Our First Amendment rights are also subject to restriction and its important that we have judges that believe in the original intent of the Constitution and Bill of rights and that hold true to the Second Amendment.
3. How strongly did I respect the legislature and never legislate from the bench?

What are the three main reasons you are running for this office? Do you see any potential conflicts of interest?

First, I’ve practiced Criminal law since 2006, and I currently served as the General Counsel for the Williamson County District Attorney’s office. I’ve handled everything from Misdemeanors to Murder, I’ve written Appeals, and I’ve even tried civil cases on behalf of the State. I have very diverse criminal, trial and appellate experience. Second, in my spare time I have donated pro bono work to Christian organizations and college students that have had their First Amendment rights infringed upon by their respective Universities. I believe that the combination of the two demonstrates a depth of content knowledge about criminal law, but also a depth of constitutional knowledge, combined with the courage to fight for those rights as a volunteer.

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?

Only if the Child is in real danger of physical harm. Usually this would entail physical abuse, extreme neglect (i.e. not giving life sustaining medicine), or abandonment. I would be more than happy to discuss this topic more if you have specific questions or incidents.

Do parents have the right to block grandparent "rights" or doctor intervention? Why/not?

I believe parental rights are supreme, so long as there is no physical harm to the child. There must be clear an d convincing evidence of physical harm to trump those rights, and that is a Very high bar to reach. I’m happy to discuss this further if you have specific questions or hypotheticals.

What can you do in your court to protect citizens from harm by illegal aliens?

The legislature has passed strong laws that criminalize drug trafficking and human trafficking. Many people that are caught commiting these crimes are illegal aliens that are trafficking drugs and humans across the border and through our State. It’s important that we have judges that understand the danger these individual present to our citizens and that takes their crimes seriously.

Do the taxpayers have a responsibility to provide an interpreter for non-English speaking illegals?  As well, do taxpayers have-to-have one available during courtroom hours just in case someone might need their services?

This is complicated because a person does have a right to understand the charges and proceedings against them. So, I would say that in a trial, there should be an interpreter. If the person is indigent, I do not know how to resolve this other than to provide an interpreter.
I do not believe that an interpreter should be available at all times-that is a waste of money. An interpreter should be considered a special situation, not the norm.

What is the job of a judge?   What is your judicial philosophy?

The job is to hear and decide appeals and writs from the lower appellate courts. My philosophy is that as a strict constructionist I will put the constitution first and protect the constitutional rights of American Citizens. In addition, a Judge should never legislate from the bench and should give great deference to laws that have been democratically passed by our legislature.

What is the proper role of a lawyer?

The proper role of a lawyer representing a person is to have complete loyalty towards their client and vigorously advocate for them. The proper role of a lawyer representing the Great State of Texas is not to convict, BUT to see that Justice is done. A lawyer for the State should manage their case load in an economical way that is efficient but also effective.

Among the nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, which one do you respect the most, and why? Which one do you respect the least, and why?

Scalia has my utmost respect. He has clarity about what the constitution is and the absurdity of some of the poor majority rulings that have come down from the Supreme Court.

I respect Kennedy the least. His opinions are the weakest when it comes to legal reasoning and he has gradually shifted to the left in a bad way for those of us that believe in the Original intent and strict construction of the Constitution.

What is the single most important action the county needs to do to keep this a great community to live in?

Secure our borders so that the cartel and terrorists can not continue to bring violence and crime into our State.

Should the state license barbers?  Lawyers? Why or why not?

I think that is a question that we should be debating more. Overall, I personally believe there is rampant over-regulation in Texas when it comes to licensing. I think there is actually more of a need for licensed Barbers than there is for Attorneys. Most people assume, when they walk into a barber, that the barber knows what they are doing—purely because they hold themselves out as a barber. Therefore, its important that someone checks up on whether that person is adequately trained, especially if they are using a straight razor!

Attorneys, on the other hand, could easily be regulated by the market. Most people interview or research an attorney before they hire that person, and I do not believe that is based on licensing. Instead it’s based on a recommendation or a reputation. Now there are some caveats to that, with indigent defense representation, and court appointments, but for the most part, people that hire attorneys and pay them, usually make an educated decision when hiring. Therefore, if the market could self-regulate through educated consumers, maybe there isn’t a need for licensing? I don’t think there is an easy answer, but it should be discussed more than it is.

What carries the greatest influence on your ruling: case law, the Constitution, or other?

The Constitution comes first, every time. Then the Statutes that have been democratically passed. Then, last, case law.

Is there anything in your background of an embarrassing nature that should be explained before your election?

No.

To what extent would you need to recuse yourself from cases because of conflicts of interest?

If there is a conflict, I would recuse myself. That would be on a case-by-case basis.

Can the legislature effectively write law that makes sense for 30 million people? Please explain your thoughts

Yes. It’s important that Texas maintain it’s unique conservative identity and not become a State where each county has it’s own laws and it’s own freedoms. The only way to do that is to have a legislature that is democratically elected and that passes laws represent the majority of citizens.