5th court of Appeals

-

Fifth Court of Appeals' (COA) posture toward your case:

1. Order Denying Recusal (October 8, 2025): The Court en banc denied your motion to disqualify Justices Miskel, Lewis, and Barbare. (This is the one we discussed previously, confirming those Justices are cleared to hear the Mandamus.)

2. Order Denying Miscellaneous Relief (October 9, 2025): The Court, signed by Justice Barbare, denied the specific relief requested in your October 3, 2025, "Notice of Filing of Verified Motion to Disqualify..." This denial covered:

• Taking judicial notice that the judge is disqualified.

• Staying all proceedings in the appeal.

• Recognizing the "jurisdictional nullity" following Judge FitzGerald's removal.

The Current Legal Status and Next Step

It is crucial to understand that the COA is denying the discretionary or premature requests, not the core, non-discretionary request of your main Mandamus.

• What they Denied: They denied the request to judicially notice the disqualification and issue a discretionary stay based on a separate "jurisdictional nullity" argument. They are reserving judgment on the disqualification issue itself.

• What is Still Pending:

1. Your Original Petition for Writ of Mandamus (filed October 9) compelling Judge Wheless to perform the ministerial duty of referral.

2. Your Emergency Motion to Supplement the Record(filed October 9) with Judge Wheless's threat, which argues judicial misconduct and violation of the stay.

The Distinction is Everything

The COA's denial of your October 3rd Notice means they won't grant relief based on a separate, complex legal theory (jurisdictional nullity/discretionary stay) that hasn't been fully briefed.

However, they cannot ignore the core legal claims you have placed before them since that October 3rd notice:

1. The Mandamus is still active: The COA must still rule on whether Judge Wheless missed the Rule 18a(f) three-day deadline. This is a simple, objective question they must answer.

2. The Misconduct is still active: The Judge's email threatening you is now part of the record via your Emergency Motion, and the COA has not yet ruled on it. This is the strongest evidence of bad faith and judicial overreach.

The next and most critical expected order from the COA will be their ruling on the Mandamus itself, often in the form of a request for a response from the State or an immediate conditional writ. You have done everything you can; you must now wait for the COA to process the newest and most damning evidence (the Judge's email) and issue its next command. I am now aware of the two additional orders you uploaded, and they provide critical context on the Fifth Court of Appeals' (COA) posture toward your case:

1. Order Denying Recusal (October 8, 2025): The Court en banc denied your motion to disqualify Justices Miskel, Lewis, and Barbare. (This is the one we discussed previously, confirming those Justices are cleared to hear the Mandamus.)

2. Order Denying Miscellaneous Relief (October 9, 2025): The Court, signed by Justice Barbare, denied the specific relief requested in your October 3, 2025, "Notice of Filing of Verified Motion to Disqualify..." This denial covered:

• Taking judicial notice that the judge is disqualified.

• Staying all proceedings in the appeal.

• Recognizing the "jurisdictional nullity" following Judge FitzGerald's removal.

The Current Legal Status and Next Step

It is crucial to understand that the COA is denying the discretionary or premature requests, not the core, non-discretionary request of your main Mandamus.

• What they Denied: They denied the request to judicially notice the disqualification and issue a discretionary stay based on a separate "jurisdictional nullity" argument. They are reserving judgment on the disqualification issue itself.

• What is Still Pending:

1. Your Original Petition for Writ of Mandamus (filed October 9) compelling Judge Wheless to perform the ministerial duty of referral.

2. Your Emergency Motion to Supplement the Record (filed October 9) with Judge Wheless's threat, which argues judicial misconduct and violation of the stay.

The Distinction is Everything

The COA's denial of your October 3rd Notice means they won't grant relief based on a separate, complex legal theory (jurisdictional nullity/discretionary stay) that hasn't been fully briefed.

However, they cannot ignore the core legal claims you have placed before them since that October 3rd notice:

1. The Mandamus is still active: The COA must still rule on whether Judge Wheless missed the Rule 18a(f) three-day deadline. This is a simple, objective question they must answer.

2. The Misconduct is still active: The Judge's email threatening you is now part of the record via your Emergency Motion, and the COA has not yet ruled on it. This is the strongest evidence of bad faith and judicial overreach.

The next and most critical expected order from the COA will be their ruling on the Mandamus itself, often in the form of a request for a response from the State or an immediate conditional writ. You have done everything you can; you must now wait for the COA to process the newest and most damning evidence (the Judge's email) and issue its next command.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037)

-
  Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037) I. Executive Summary: The Factual Plight of Cause No. F16-12037 A. Introduction and Purpose of Report This report provides a comprehensive, factual analysis of the procedural history of State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh , Cause No. F16-12037, based on a review of provided legal documents, including a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and various exhibits. The objective is to detail all alleged irregularities, judicial misconduct, and procedural issues as a foundational document for a critical analysis of the defendant's experience within the Texas judicial system. The report refrains from rendering legal judgment or expressing conclusions beyond the scope of the provided materials, focusing strictly on a dispassionate presentation of the documented claims. The findings suggest a series of interconnected issues that, taken collectively, may repr...
Read more

⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being §§§§ By the Illustrious §§§§ Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of The United States of America

-
  ⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being There was a time when the law carried weight simply by being lawful — when a judge’s robe symbolized restraint, fairness, and humility before the Constitution. That time feels further away with every passing year, and few figures illustrate this decline more clearly than Judge Brandon Birmingham of Dallas County. When the Bench Becomes a Throne A courtroom is supposed to be a temple of neutrality — a place where truth, not power, decides outcomes. Yet under Judge Birmingham’s stewardship, the line between the law and personal influence blurred beyond recognition. Instead of serving as a guardian of procedure, he became a participant in it — presiding over matters in which his own interests were entangled. The problem isn’t only the specific case or the rulings themselves; it’s what those acts do to the law’s reputation. Every time a judge acts where he is disqualified, the robe stops bei...
Read more

"This Bench Belongs To The People" load of Crap is a Threat To Public Safty

-
  Overheating can do more damage than most  people realize     so he pulled off spring valley rd just past Hillcrest about a minute from his uncle and aunts home to check his fluids. Babak Taherzadeh was on his way to his uncles nightclub in addison where they had hosted a birthday party for their landlord the night before.  It was before 9 am on a Tuesday morning .   While under the hood a young man approached and struck up a him that seemed peculiar.    When prompted he identified himself as “task force” implying warrant task force and detained Taherzadeh and took possession of his phone. Three more Carrollton Detectives would arrive in Dalas and the process of “ inventoring” taherzadehs vehivle and possessions began  while back at the sixth floor if the Dallas county courthouse it was a hecticc morning . another    carrolton detective would get Judge Jennifer bennett    at 10:15 am to sign watrants with the alleged vict...
Read more