X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:In March 2006, a fight broke out in the prison recreation yard at the facility where DaShun Hatcher was incarcerated. A prison guard told the administrative hearing official representing the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s institutional division (TDCJ-ID) that Hatcher had been involved in the fight. Hatcher denied his involvement and now claims that the only reason the guard identified Hatcher as a participant in the fight is because Hatcher is black (the participants in the fight had been described as black or Hispanic) and because a “rec yard log” showed Hatcher as being in the prison recreation yard when the fight broke out. An administrative hearing official within the TDCJ-ID found Hatcher had violated the prison’s rules by being involved in a fight. As a result, authorities raised Hatcher’s inmate classification from a low-risk prisoner to a medium-risk prisoner, he lost one year of good time credit, he lost 45 days of commissary privileges, and he was placed on cell restriction for 45 days. Hatcher filed Step 1 and Step 2 grievances within the TDCJ-ID in an attempt to have his good time credit restored and his inmate risk classification lowered, but his attempts were unsuccessful. The last of these administrative review proceedings was completed on June 9, 2006. Hatcher filed the current suit July 11, 2006, in the district court of Anderson County to seek judicial review of the TDCJ-ID’s administrative hearing decisions. The trial court dismissed Hatcher’s suit on Dec. 14, 2006, and assessed court costs against Hatcher. Hatcher filed a motion for reinstatement on Jan. 25, 2007, which was never ruled upon by the trial court. Hatcher then appealed to the 12th Court of Appeals. HOLDING:Affirmed. In his first point of error, Hatcher contended the trial court abused its discretion by assessing court costs which were not in accord with Chapter 14 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. The thrust of Hatcher’s appellate complaint, the court stated, is his belief that Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code �14.006 serves to cap the amount of court costs the trial court can order him to pay at 20 percent of the balance of his inmate trust account’s deposits for the preceding six months. The court, however, deemed incorrect Hatcher’s interpretation of the statute. Rather than limit the court costs that may be assessed against a prison inmate at 20 percent of his inmate trust account’s deposits for the preceding six months, the court stated that the plain language of �14.006 clearly sets out a payment schedule whereby the TDCJ-ID is instructed to submit periodic payments for the total court costs assessed based on the amounts deposited in the inmate’s trust account. Thus, the court found that the trial court’s order followed the statutory scheme authorized by the state Legislature. In his next appellate issue, Hatcher contended that the trial court erred by dismissing his complaint pursuant to �14.005. Inasmuch as Hatcher failed to provide a signed affidavit that could have otherwise been deemed adequate under �14.005, the court did not find that the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing Hatcher’s petition for statutory noncompliance. In his final point of error, Hatcher contended that the trial court erred both by failing to conduct an oral hearing on his motion to reinstate and by failing to grant his motion to reinstate. The court found that “inasmuch as the lack of a proper affidavit supported the trial court’s order of dismissal, and inasmuch as Hatcher failed to address the issue concerning his failure to provide an adequate affidavit within his”motion to amend,’ ” the court could not say that the trial court erred by either failing to conduct a live hearing on Hatcher’s motion or by failing to grant Hatcher’s motion for reinstatement. OPINION:Moseley, J.; Morriss, C.J., and Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.