Texas Supreme Court Orders & Opinions 6/12/09

The Texas Supreme Court released two new opinions with this week's regular orders, both of which involved petitions for writ of mandamus.

In In re Hall (No. 07-0322), the Court held that an indigent adult who had been adjudicated delinquent as a minor and received a 40-year sentence had no statutory right under the Juvenile Justice Code to appointed counsel in a habeas corpus proceeding.  The Court did not decide the case based on the offender's age, but instead relied on statutory language limiting the right to appointed habeas counsel to situations in which "the legality of detention" has been challenged.  Because the Court determined that "detention" means "pre-adjudication confinement of the child, not the post-adjudication commitment at issue here," it denied mandamus relief.

Aside from its outcome, Hall is significant because the relator received assistance in the supreme court through the State Bar Appellate Section's Pro Bono Pilot Program.  The Texas Bar Journal recently published an article covering that program, and I have previously discussed it here.

In In re International Profit Associates, Inc. (No. 08-0531) (per curiam), the Court granted mandamus relief from a trial court's order refusing to dismiss a lawsuit in favor of arbitration.  As a condition of enforcing a forum-selection clause in the parties' contract, the trial court had required the movant to prove that it pointed the clause out to to the plaintiff when they made the agreement.  The supreme court determined that the order improperly shifted the burden of proof, which lies with the party opposing a forum-selection clause, and thus abused its discretion.

More Recusal Motions Coming in Texas Appeals

This morning's release of the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. (No. 08-22) could open the door to more recusal motions in Texas appellate courts (and possibly trial courts).

In Caperton, the Court held that due process required a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals justice to recuse himself from a case in which his largest single campaign contributor was a party.  The story reads much like John Grisham's The Appeal (discussed here and here) in which a litigant set out to purchase a state supreme court seat to swing the necessary votes its way.

Texas also elects its judiciary, and the issue of judicial campaign finance is an ongoing source of controversy.  I'll leave more detailed analysis of Caperton to the SCOTUS pundits, but it is difficult to imagine that this decision won't have a significant trickle-down effect.

Update:  Don Cruse has reviewed the case in more detail over at The Supreme Court of Texas Blog.

Spring Appellate Advocate Now Available

The Spring issue of The Appellate Advocate has been posted to the Appellate Section's website.  In addition to the usual features, this issue contains announcements seeking applications for the position of editor (due June 30) and entries for the Section's annual songwriting contest (due August 15).  See the publication for details.