Court Opinion

ID: 9659587
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 21:50:13.067631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:09.653098
License: Public Domain

ESQUIVEL, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in part and dissent in part with the result reached by the majority. I would reverse and render. I cannot agree that this cause should be remanded to the trial court for a hearing on the merits. A hearing on the merits has been held and it is the court’s denial of the writ of habeas corpus that is before us.
It is undisputed that the relator herein was entitled to custody under the terms of a prior order awarding managing conserva-torship to her. Further, the issue of dire emergency was not raised due to the absence of a pleading responding to relator’s application for writ of habeas corpus filed in the court below. In light of the absence of allegations of a serious immediate question concerning the welfare of the children, the grant of the writ of habeas corpus should have been automatic, immediate and ministerial.
I would, therefore, hold that relator is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the Honorable Ben Martinez, Judge of the 293rd District Court, to grant Young’s application for writ of habeas corpus. TEX. R.CIV.P. 383.