King High School

I bet the JUDGE would fail the Same Test

2008-05-30T22:30:00.000-07:00

I told you that TAKS test is a JOKE!!!!!

JUST ask the politicians who created it.

I bet the JUDGE would fail the Same Test

More Local News

* Noe in Corpus Christi
* 40 Years of Corpus Christi City Managers
* Noe resigns as city manager

The most emailed stories in the last 3 days

* It's way better than fast food: It's Eva
* Noe resigns as city manager
* Student wants to walk the stage
* Christian artist to perform here for fundraiser
* Judge denies suit to walk at graduation
* Battle for engineer program begins
* 3 area gas projects stalled
* Exhibits growing rapidly
* 4 area schools honored for TAKS results
* 9 CCISD students arrested in senior spree

The hottest topics in the last 24 hours.

* No walk across the stage, judge rules (247)
* Noe resigns as city manager (131)
* Student wants to walk the stage (431)
* Letters to the Editor: 05.30.08 (22)
* S. Tx. constable arrested on drug trafficking charges (20)
* Trooper is accused of abusing authority (19)
* Flamethrower (16)
* Judge denies suit to walk at graduation (191)
* Sect children housed locally not moved, yet (14)
* Police detain 9 students in trespassing sprees (13)

VIEW MORE HOT TOPICS »
ADVERTISEMENT
No walk across the stage, judge rules
Students who didn't pass test loses in court

By Mary Ann Cavazos (Contact)
Originally published 05:14 a.m., May 30, 2008
Updated 05:14 a.m., May 30, 2008
Should students who don’t pass the TAKS be allowed to walk at graduation?

Yes

No

Or view the results »

A judge denied an 18-year-old King High School senior's request Thursday for a temporary restraining order against CCISD that would have allowed her to participate in this weekend's graduation ceremony despite her failing the TAKS.

District Judge Bobby Galvan ruled against Khara Garcia and her mother, Dalia Brem, who sought the injunction against the Corpus Christi Independent School District.

Their attorneys, Rene Rodriguez and Angelica Hernandez, had argued the district's longstanding policy discriminated against Garcia and other students who failed the TAKS by barring them from participating in the ceremonies.

The district's attorney, Philip Fraissinet, said Garcia was given five chances to pass the test and that a ruling in her favor would leave open the possibility that any student who failed, was expelled or didn't have the class credits could participate in the ceremony.

Several district board members and administrators appeared at Thursday's court hearing, along with more than half a dozen students who, like Garcia, had failed the state exam.

After the judge's ruling, Rodriguez said there would be no point to filing an appeal because it is so close to Saturday's graduation ceremony.

"There's nothing we can do at this point," Rodriguez said.

Brem said the district's policy is unfair and added the TAKS is too difficult for many to pass.

"There were honor students that didn't pass the TAKS," Brem said. "I don't know that I could pass it."

She said she was unsure if her daughter would attend Saturday's ceremony to watch classmates walk across the stage without her.

"The class of 2008 is her family," Brem said, adding attending likely would be too painful.

Superintendent Scott Elliff said it was unfortunate that Garcia and other students would not be able to participate because the district wants all the students to succeed.

"Certainly, we feel for the plaintiff and the other students who are in this situation," Elliff said.

Garcia and other seniors still have another chance to pass the TAKS this summer. A separate graduation ceremony for those students will be in August.

Contact Mary Ann Cavazos at 886-3623 or cavazosm@caller.com

You must follow these rules in order to post comments:

* 1. Keep it clean.Comments that are obscene, vulgar, lewd or sexually-oriented will get the ax. Creative spelling of such terms also will be banned.
* 2. Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
* 3. Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything.
* 4. Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
* 6. Keep it local. Do not post direct links to sites outside of Caller.com.
* 7. Police yourselves. Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
* 8. Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
* 9. Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
* 10. Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
* 11.Help us get it right. If you find a factual error or misspelling, email newmedia@caller.com or metrodesk@caller.com, or call 886-3697.

(249) User Comments:
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 283478 on May 30, 2008 at 5:35 a.m.

Take a look at the TAKS test before you comment on it. Its on the Texas Education Agency's website -free to all.

These are SIMPLE tests, the reading is a joke and although one would need to study a little math before taking the Math test, this child has had math every school day of her life for about 16 years. My own children not only have passed each time but have often had perfect scores.

Our area is low in education - below average for our state. The worst thing that we don't like to talk about is that TEXAS according to the Rand Corporation who studied all 50 state's exams, is near the very bottom as far as difficulty and passing rates on national exams. In fact if it weren't for Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, guess where we'd be ranked?

This child's mom should have devoted more time to her child's education rather that paying attorney's. Local taxpayers now have to foot the bill for this court action.

These tests are far from perfect but they are the only way to compare different schools and different districts. I do agree that educators shouldn't teach the test - just teach the fundamentals.

Excuses,excuses excuses - this kid failed 5 times. Sorry!

P.S. I am a member of the school board in Aransas County. I once wrote an article comparing the area school districts, however the Caller-Times couldn't handle it and all the data was published last month in the Coastal Bend Herald.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 246343 on May 30, 2008 at 5:54 a.m.

Hats off to Judge Galvan. 5 times and Garcia couldnt pass the exam? Try staying off You Tube and studying a little more. Shame on momma Brem for setting the example to her daughter that if you can't measure up with countless other students just sue someone.
I have a 3rd grader who missed the mark on the reading exit level by two points. This is an A & B student and he missed the mark by two points. HE came to me and said "I have one more chance to take the test and only two points to go." Now there is winning attitude. He and I are consuming the study materials with vigor and he WILL pass the test when it issued again.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708171 on May 30, 2008 at 6:01 a.m.

Good call by the Judge, but this ruling was a no-brainer.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 703885 on May 30, 2008 at 6:03 a.m.

Got to hand it to that Dahlia lady. She sure made it clear to anyone else wanting their child to walk the stage. NO!!! If you didnt get that but hell no!!! As for that other girls from Moody High school crying the sob story. You too... NO!! As for the daughter? Take off the blue contacts (cause they dont look right) and get your behind back there and pass it like everyone else. And if you dont pass it do it again til you do.....
related links Posted by 711762 on May 30, 2008 at 6:17 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 703885 on May 30, 2008 at 6:22 a.m.

yeah really... "life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you going to get". And she got alright... kick in the head...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 427774 on May 30, 2008 at 6:44 a.m.

I still say they should have been allowed to walk depending on class grades. Yes - given the opportunity 5 times does prove abundant opportunity, and I don't see how those involved in this case didn't know the facts well in advance of any plans made.

It's high school. It's not like the difference made in their lives on this one night is unimportant, and especially if they don't go on to earn their diploma by passing the TAKS. Appears there will be many walking the stage that will not actually receive diplomas because of the 'late date' issuing of class grades.

Some students will fail final exams that are being taken this week, walk the stage, and NOT receive their diplomas. Are ALL of the grades in, and organized to ensure that doesn't happen??? What's the actual difference? Neither will receive their diplomas as scheduled, but only those who failed the TAKS tests will not be allowed to walk.

Allowing them to walk does not diminish the principles of earned and deserved recognition. Not allowing them to walk diminishes the recognition for what they HAVE accomplished in completing the courses of high school, and when they are passing classes??? As compared to questioned matters of engineered testing???

No, this case does not appear to deserve the actions of the court simply because the 'quantity of failure was used to present the case. That does not mean there are not individual cases out there that do. And when we consider the drop out rates - what's the point of accomplishing the full time required only to fail when they may not have failed according to 'classroom' requirements?

The national levels of focus are engineered to target the accomplishments of the schools according the required level of academic knowledge. It really is a matter of principle that students serve the consequences of those well intentioned efforts.

Not that educators are failing according to direct skills, and accomplished effort in educating students. It matters that those simple facts of direct involvement aren't enough anymore - and aren't allowed either.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 233913 on May 30, 2008 at 6:54 a.m.

in response to 427774

I don't agree... I think that high school is where students should begin learning about the real world. Many go from high school into the work force, and they need to understand consequences. Too many enter the work force believing that they should be reward just because they are there... not because of a level of achievement. I believe that this is, in part, because we have allowed our teens to feel they should be rewarded just because we treasure them, and not because they have reached goals.

There may well be alot wrong with our school systems - and it may well be that the TAKs test is a failure in and of itself. It may also be that our graduations are a "rite" of passage at the end of the year, and should be delayed a week or two after the final grades are actually in place. Regardless - "walking the stage" should be a privilege for those who "earned" the right. At least, that's my opinion.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 425699 on May 30, 2008 at 6:58 a.m.

I would imagine that Timothy McVey, Adolph Hitler, Lee Harvey Oswald, The Uni-Bomber, Jeffrey Dahlmer,... and thousands of others like them passed plenty of academic tests.
Tests are stupid... they don't PROVE anything. Deal with that.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 409487 on May 30, 2008 at 7:02 a.m.

well lets see the taks test is taken in every state in the united states being from a Military family my own children had to take this test in different school , but also follow that states rules , my youngest son is going to school here in texas and its no different , why should some be able to walk and others not its all about taks ,regardless how hard you worked to make good grades it doesnt matter if you dont pass this test, its really not fair but what is fair in life nothing you have to work for what ever you want in life and it dont came cheap anymore those children with parents who have money think that it will always work well think again its not fair to the other children who did work hard to pass this test < and whats even bad , you cant buy everything with money
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 359472 on May 30, 2008 at 7:09 a.m.

in response to 425699

Hey stupid! Do a little research on the twisted people you just mentioned, you just might find how highly educated they are, they just chose to use it in an evil manner.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 425699 on May 30, 2008 at 7:18 a.m.

in response to 359472

My precise point. Can't you read?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238145 on May 30, 2008 at 7:20 a.m.

For the argument that "some people freak out when they take test and have passing grades in school" does not make sense. I believe the teachers are giving students their grades by guess what, tests!!! I never had any teachers just randomly assign grades to students because they just look smart, nope, a test would determine that.

Test - a set of questions, problems, or the like, used as a means of evaluating the abilities, aptitudes, skills, or performance of an individual or group; examination.

The test is not that hard, study the TAKS study guide, focus and concetrate!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712045 on May 30, 2008 at 7:33 a.m.

She said she was unsure if her daughter would attend Saturday's ceremony to watch classmates walk across the stage without her.

"The class of 2008 is her family," Brem said, adding attending likely would be too painful.

-------------------------------Mrs. Brem, you know what is PAINFULL???Attending my daughter's funeral was painful but I did it so stop being brats (both mother & daughter) and attend the ceremony in support of her so called family, friends, and classmates and show some pride.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 298842 on May 30, 2008 at 7:35 a.m.

The Garcia girl needs to learn there are rules to follow in life and that life is tough. Her mama is not helping any, nor are her attorneys.
Good call by the Judge in this case.
I think 5 times is enough chances to pass anything.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 253740 on May 30, 2008 at 7:36 a.m.

Way to go judge Galvan!!! Walking across the stage is a Privilege not a Right and should be earned.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 241893 on May 30, 2008 at 7:36 a.m.

Take the cell phone away and STUDY!!!!!!!!!! That's all it takes.............
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 257135 on May 30, 2008 at 7:36 a.m.

in response to 425699

Obviously you can't pass a test either. Deal with that !!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 257135 on May 30, 2008 at 7:42 a.m.

in response to 712045

I agree with you 100%. Does this kid really think that her classmates are going to care if she's walking across the stage or not? It's their moment to shine; they passed ALL tests and they earned it and she didn't.

This is not a life or death situation so to the Brem families, get a grip and grow up !! If any of you had spent as much time helping her study as you have with the media and FRIVOLOUS law suit, she might be walking the stage tomorrow.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 269019 on May 30, 2008 at 7:44 a.m.

It would have been patently unfair to all the other students who met the requirements for graduation if someone who had not met those requirements was allowed to walk the stage.

Graduation is a public acknowledgement and affirmation of achievement--only those who have achieved should be allowed to participate.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 359472 on May 30, 2008 at 7:48 a.m.

in response to 425699

Then I guess this was a blessing in the disguise? "Imagine" what she could do with an education under her belt, as lazy as she is and wanting to cut corners in life. She just may have made your list of twisted people you mentioned.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 698482 on May 30, 2008 at 7:50 a.m.

in response to 427774

Reply to: 427774

You're right they should be allowed to walk across the stage... with a big scarlet F plastered across their foreheads...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 388859 on May 30, 2008 at 7:50 a.m.

Ha! Too funny! Just found that old article people are talking about on the fashion closet snoop! That is too funny! Sorry, just had to mention it! LOL
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 384949 on May 30, 2008 at 7:51 a.m.

I am very happy with the outcome.

Those that know this student can count the days missed from school and know that that surely had something to do with the failed test. They can also wonder why her car was taken away from her and sold (her wild ways, perhaps?). And perhaps her mother can tell the whole truth and admit how much time her daughter spent studying versus time spent partying.

Bottom line, you earn things in life; they shouldn't ne taken for granted. You don't get things just for showing up. I am not sure why parents feel that they or their kids are entitled to privileges without having to earn them. Perhaps in this case, becuase Marion Luna Brem gave her sons senior jobs despite a lack of experience (even when criminal and other events would have kept others from employment), the family feels they are somehow above the rules.

Sometimes people have too much money and it is used to attempt to manipulate others to bend or alter rules in their favor. CONGATS to the judge for not letting money, bad parenting and poor life choices degrade and deminish the honor of those that worked hard to earn the right to walk on stage and graduate.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 287001 on May 30, 2008 at 7:56 a.m.

in response to 425699

Uhhh......OK. Great logic. Wow!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329836 on May 30, 2008 at 7:56 a.m.

Did anyone else think Ms Garcia might be in the "family way?"
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 388859 on May 30, 2008 at 7:59 a.m.

WOW! She actually thinks and says she looks like Eva Longoria!

You are soo right! TOO freaking funny!!

Stop the running, for real, it's NOT working! Maybe try weights or something like that, something to give you shape and some sort of tone?? I'm just sayin! LOL Oh! And way to go in embarassing your daughter! Gosh! How sad! I would die if my mom ever announced to the whole city how dumb I am for not passing my taks 5 TIMES! Good job!

LOL Eva Longoria! Ha, sorry, just can't get over that! Laughing soo freaking hard right now!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 234209 on May 30, 2008 at 8:01 a.m.

THE LAW IS THE LAW, WAY TO GO JUDGE GALVAN.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 462063 on May 30, 2008 at 8:05 a.m.

Good!!! She shouldn't walk!! Maybe if she had spent more time studying, she would have passed.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712045 on May 30, 2008 at 8:05 a.m.

in response to 329836

I was wondering the same thing. On last night's newscast, it seemed as she was covering her stomach with her big purse. Maybe mama needs to concentrate on that instead of worrying that attending would be too "painful".
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 241057 on May 30, 2008 at 8:11 a.m.

Maybe she should be home schooled, or find a career that isn't connected to education. There are plenty of jobs out there. Look at all the drop outs and undocumented workers, most of whom don't have education. Alot of them have jobs.Not everyone is cut out to be schooled, and it's clear after 5 times of testing she doesn't make the grade. Reality check! Oh yea, why not get a government handout.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 296404 on May 30, 2008 at 8:18 a.m.

Maybe she should opt to be placed in Special ed
Then get exempt from the Taks and be an IEP grad...

There are a number of kids who wil be walking and receiving a diploma who never passed taks....
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 408779 on May 30, 2008 at 8:24 a.m.

She apparently failed Sex Education, too.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 416377 on May 30, 2008 at 8:27 a.m.

way to go Judge Galvan, Ms Garcia had many chances to pass, she just did not want to.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 703142 on May 30, 2008 at 8:36 a.m.

Ms. Brem.
Those over-sized sunglasses didn't cover ANYTHING up!
Next time...try a wig.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 252006 on May 30, 2008 at 8:49 a.m.

In Response to 329836

I also notice this and was wondering if she was or not?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712812 on May 30, 2008 at 8:52 a.m.

in response to 425699

so tests are stupid because evil people pass them......yeah, that makes a lot of sense......
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329836 on May 30, 2008 at 8:58 a.m.

Maybe that's why her mom was pushing for the graduation now because in August it will be too obvious. Who knows!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 319181 on May 30, 2008 at 9 a.m.

i am sorry but if she could not pass it in five attempts she deserves to sit in the audiance and watch.CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL 2008 GRADS
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 239763 on May 30, 2008 at 9:04 a.m.

I support this mother's decision. She did what she that was right for her daughter! The test is stupid! Colleges will accept you without the TAKS results (of course you do need the diploma to actually begin classes) because they only care about your high school grades!! A rep from the TEA stated on KRIS that they are getting rid of TAKS starting with the freshman on 2011-2012! She said the test consists of 4 yrs of info. Who really remembers what you learned in 9th grade when you are in 12th? I didn't & I was a honor student.

To all seniors that didn't pass the TAKS:
Don't give up! Try your best & you will succeed! Hold your heads up high!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 284374 on May 30, 2008 at 9:10 a.m.

The only problem I have with this, is that one of the t.v. stations reported something about the Superintendent was supposed to have a PHD when he got hired but didn't. he only had a masters, so they bent the rules for his benefit, but not for the student. This is a bunch of crap and he needs to resign since apparentlly he was qualified for the position.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 342632 on May 30, 2008 at 9:11 a.m.

The judge was correct in his decision. I'm also glad that the judge was hispanic, other wise there would have been trouble.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 241449 on May 30, 2008 at 9:14 a.m.

I would rather read about successful student's accomplishments in the newspaper rather than the failure of one.

Congratulations to all the seniors that will be graduating this weekend that actually worked for and deserved the privelege of walking the stage and receiving your diploma. Way to go class of 2008!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329836 on May 30, 2008 at 9:16 a.m.

post 239763

You think it was right for her mother to say FORGET THE RULES, I'll take care of this for you honey. Well you know what? It didn't work. They may be getting rid of the test in a few years but they haven't yet.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 250840 on May 30, 2008 at 9:16 a.m.

These tests are not difficult, and the students have multiple opportunities to take and to pass them before the commencement ceremony. Maybe the young lady has a learning disability and isn't aware of it or maybe she just ins't very bright. She did not meet all of the requirements to graduate in the spring semester, so she shouldn't be walking with the students who did.

I love how her mother claims there are honors students who didn't pass the TAKS. Doubtful. I repeat: this is not a difficult test. Then she goes on to say she probably couldn't pass the test...duh. Sounds like the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
related links Posted by 248394 on May 30, 2008 at 9:22 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 363309 on May 30, 2008 at 9:24 a.m.

Bottom line.....this is Mama's faught. She is suppose to be the parent. Since my children have been taking the TAKs test, we study, we sacrafice, we take away cell phones, TV's, Ipods and the luxury of having a social life. EVeryone knows, you have to pass this test, or you do NOT graduate. Why are these few children so special, "I did not pass the test five times, I should be able to walk across the stage" boo hoo. Buck up, go back and study, and try try again.
Mommy should have worked closer with the teachers and counselors to monitor Misse's grades and progress before now. This begins Freshman year, with the practice test. Then Spohmore year is the real deal, two times to take the test. The ideal situation whould have been to pass the test the first time, or second.

There is entirely too many study guides available and rehab programs in all of the schools.
Shame on Khara for not applying herself, this means more book time and less social time. If she spent as much time on studies as she did on clothes, makeup, fake contacts and the phone, she would not be in this situation.
Shame on Mommy for not being a Pro-active parent when it really counted, during school when her daughter was failing the test for the first and second and third time.

Oh, and when you go public with something like this, you leave yourself and your family wide open for all types of criticisms. You should have thought about that before YOU, Mommy, opened this can of worms.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 234573 on May 30, 2008 at 9:25 a.m.

Ok, thought I'd put some thoughts in here without personal attacks.

I don't think Mrs. Brem deserves the anger that seems to be thrown at her. I think she is misguided - and that she is missing an opportunity to make her daughter stronger and more able to face lifes challenges. By missing the mark - her daughter can learn the hard way that things won't always be given to you and that you need to work hard for it - (much the same way her grandmother earned it and apparently her mother as well).

The hardest lessons are the ones best learned. I guarantee there are going to be hundreds of CCISD graduates that had been able to coast through high school that did not learn that lesson and will fail out of college as a result.

I worked nearly full time in High School (and I didn't take it seriously). I didn't graduate. But I also never blamed anyone else for my situation. I got my GED went to work and worked my way through an Associates, Bachelors and Masters.

From what I know of others that were in my High School class - some went through college and have built good lives for themselves - others failed out of college and have struggled - others didn't go to college and have been successful - and still others did nothing and haven't accomplished much.

Mrs. Brem, I don't believe that any of us have a right to criticize or say that your daughter is stupid or that she didn't try. We don't know the situation. But I do feel compelled to offer you my advice.

Sit down with your daughter. Let her know that it is ok to fail - but that she has to take responsibility for it. She has to evaluate it and determine what she can do to succeed in the future. You clearly have an educated and successful family for this girl to learn from. Let her know how hard you've had to work. Use your mother-in-law as an example. She was never given anything, and I'm sure she had her share of obstacles.

I don't doubt you want what is best for your daughter. You wouldn't subject yourself to this circus if you didn't care about your daughters welfare. I honestly believe that the best thing you can do is to take your daughter to that graduation. Let her feel the pain. She needs to learn from that pain. You can't protect her from dissappointment - but you can teach her how to handle it with grace and integrity.

Twenty years from now - I hope that your daughter will be able to talk about her experience, about how it felt, and how she was able to overcome it and succeed. Rather than being an ordinary grad - she has the opportunity to be an extraordinary story.

All my hopes and wishes for your daughter.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 250840 on May 30, 2008 at 9:26 a.m.

in response to 239763

A TAKS score is not a requirement when applying to a college, however, a HS diploma or a GED is, and in order to get your HS diploma, the state of Texas requires that you pass the TAKS. Does this one test tell all about a student? Of course not, but for now, it's the name of the game. I wonder what this young lady's grades were like because if you cannot pass the TAKS, there is a problem.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that the reason you don't "remember" your 9th grade education is because you actually "learned" something. Learning and remembering/memorizing are two different things. I work with high school students and can attest to the fact that there are a lot of students who would rather be spoonfed and memorize rather than to actually learn something.

I was an honors student, too, and the TAKS/TAAS are jokes. The bigger joke is that people can't pass them.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 242439 on May 30, 2008 at 9:28 a.m.

To those who side with this lady because the TAKS is evil incarnate, especially to 239763, guess what? You may not need this test now, but I bet you a MILLION DOLLARS that you'll have to take one just like it - it's called the THEA, SAT, ACT, and their ilk, to get into college. When I enrolled in 1999, I had to take the TESP (old test before the THEA) to attend college.

Besides, if you REALLY were an honors student and knew everything there was to know, the TAKS would be a piece of cake. You DON'T deserve to be called an honors student if you can't even pass a low-level test like the TAKS (kind of makes you wonder how the student would be considered an honors student in the first place).
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710826 on May 30, 2008 at 9:32 a.m.

in response to 241449

Thank you, I agree with your point. I want to read about real life success stories with our kids.

There was an article on MSN business yesterday that it is possible to attend several Ivy League schools for "free", including Harvard and Yale. I would like to see the Caller Times do an article on this. The article I read states that family income has to be below $180,000 a year so there might be just one or two families from the area that qualify (sarcasm). The schools are having to offer these deals because they have so much money in endowments than what they know what to with.

Please follow up CT, maybe we can read in our paper about the real deal with our kids.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 335574 on May 30, 2008 at 9:33 a.m.

If the Brem girl would have spent more time studying and less time getting knocked up she might have passed the TAKS test. No wonder her mom fought so hard to get the rule changed. Walking across the stage to get her diploma would have probably been her only chance for recognition. Sad but true.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712060 on May 30, 2008 at 9:37 a.m.

There are rules and they have to be followed. Making exceptions for one student will open the floodgates.

I agree that the TAKS test is not an indication as to the intellegence or lack of, of a student. In college, everthing is very analytical and professors challege students to think, rather than guess if A B or C is the answer. However, the test is something all student must take and pass. I don't agree with the rules and regulations of my job. But there are consequences if I don't adhere to them.

Mom needs chill out. If I didn't pass the TAKS test, you better believe my mom wouldn't be hiring lawyers to help me get my way. She'd take me to graduation and say, "Look, stupid...that could have been you walking across that stage."

I hope six times is the charm.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710197 on May 30, 2008 at 9:52 a.m.

in response to 425699

Failing the TAKS test PROVES that this girl couldn't accomplish what the majority of her classmates did. Deal with that.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 288678 on May 30, 2008 at 9:57 a.m.

Thanks you Judge Galvan. Rules are rules and laws are laws and we need more people to stick with them.

If you let this girl walk the stage it diminishes the meaning of it for all the other students that did rightfully pass.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 244585 on May 30, 2008 at 9:57 a.m.

in response to 233913

"I don't agree... I think that high school is where students should begin learning about the real"

I couldn't agree with you more!! The real world says that if you don't pass a driving test, you don't get a license. If you don't pass a drug test, you don't get the job you're applying for. The real world says you don't always get what you want! The real world says Mommy can't come to your rescue everytime! That's what athe real world says. You don't "get" to walk across the stage, you "earn the privilege" of walking across the stage. Don't dumb down our schools. Parents need to get on their kids, take away freedom and make sure they study enough.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699874 on May 30, 2008 at 10:04 a.m.

I can't believe the Mom had the nerve to try to put the blame on the judge for her daughter's failures. Shame on the Mom for not being a better role model. Where is the personal responsibility for the Mom and the daughter?? I'm guessing the daughter did not care and did not study.

It would have been a slap in the face to everyone who worked hard to pass the test to give this one girl a "free pass".
Good call, Judge !
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 363309 on May 30, 2008 at 10:09 a.m.

In response to post 248394

First of all, you have missed the point...what a surprise, this is about a parent being neglectful, and not tutoring her student.

You must be the most perfect human being. I hope all of your children and grand children do not have to pay for the "Sins of there Father". You might be white, but you are more ignorant than any other color, race out there.

Gettin "Knoked up" is not just a Hispanic epidemic. Just this week, two WHITE girls, under the age of 18 have revealed they two are Knocked up. One comes from a family with both parents, the other from a single father.

Homeys are not just Hispanic. Have you checked out Houston, and Dallas lately? Chicago and Cleveland? The numbers are the same for the Whites getting knocked up and generation after generation following in the same footsteps. The government continues to pay and allow this to happen. This is going on everywhere. Not just in South Texas.

Oh, and if you knew anything, we are not paying for this lawsuit, the family of Ms. Garcia is paying. She has to hire the attorney and pay the court cost, which include the fees for the baliff and courtreporter. But you are so smart, you knew that, right?

As far as Mr. Rodriguez goes, he is in this to make money. It is not his place to tell the customer anything except that he will defend them, right or wrong as long as they pay. That is a "Right" that was earned for all of us Americans. Are you an American? you do not sound like one.

And if you don't like it here in South Texas, North Mex, move the Hell away! We don't want your kind here.

Viva South Texas
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699123 on May 30, 2008 at 10:09 a.m.

God has a plan- This is not the plan, criticizing, bashing and insulting. Please people just relax and thank god your healthy, alive and well.
related links Posted by 245502 on May 30, 2008 at 10:14 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712040 on May 30, 2008 at 10:16 a.m.

Ms. Brem, my boss just told me that if he catches me blogging on this site again I am going to get fired. Will you please file a restraining order against him so he can't fire me?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 230598 on May 30, 2008 at 10:23 a.m.

Amen!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 10:23 a.m.

Is she really pregnant? I missed her on the news this morning. If she is, that would explain the problem right there!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712789 on May 30, 2008 at 10:24 a.m.

alot of these kids dont take these tests serious at the beginning when they should. i mean at the beginning of the school year when the teachers first start talking about it.they wait till right before the test and when they fail they dont want to face it and dont want to be the only one from there friends that fail and ofcourse having to tell your family you failed...In life you dont get 5 chances to do alot of things if you dont do it the first time...tough luck..what are you suppose to do when you grow up and have your own bills to pay and u cant pay them on time..you cant look for excuses...its sad that you go to school for all these years but it only takes one test to keep you from walking the stage but if thats the rules then it applies to everyone and you just have to deal with it and make the best of it.. this isnt nothing new becuase when i was in school we had the taas test and if you didnt pass that you couldnt walk the stage either so just because they changed to name of the test doesnt make the matter any different..and alot of people who have commented might have a point.maybeen if more attention would have been payed since the beginning about this test instead of other extra curricular activies then maybee the outcome wouldve been ALOT better..sorry for this little girl but life goes on..... CONGRATS TO ALL GRADS!!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 230598 on May 30, 2008 at 10:25 a.m.

She looked pregnant with that blue very loose blouse she was wearing!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329836 on May 30, 2008 at 10:27 a.m.

post 708377

It hasn't been proven. She looks like she is, but who knows?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238212 on May 30, 2008 at 10:28 a.m.

Don't they spend a lot of time learning how to pass the TAKS during their shcool years? I have also heard that there is no such thing as bad publicity no matter what business your in.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710826 on May 30, 2008 at 10:30 a.m.

in response to 363309

"As far as Mr. Rodriguez goes, he is in this to make money. It is not his place to tell the customer anything except that he will defend them, right or wrong as long as they pay. That is a "Right" that was earned for all of us Americans. Are you an American? you do not sound like one."

As far as Mr. Rodriguez goes and because as you rightfully state this is a right "earned" for all of us Americans, does Mr. Rodriguez not also have the right to say "no" to a potential client. I do not believe there is a law that he must defend anyone that comes before him to secure his services and in my opinion, this is a case that I would have respectfully declined..
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 362344 on May 30, 2008 at 10:30 a.m.

isnt that marion luna brem's granddaughter? or am i wrong?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710197 on May 30, 2008 at 10:34 a.m.

I just think it is really sad that this poor girl with obvious self esteem problems already - that blue blouse wasn't covering the evidence very well - now has her mom announcing to the whole community that her daughter has repeatedly failed the MINIMUM standards test. I think it is all about the mom. She is upset she doesn't get to have the big party she was planning - or so she keeps saying. If it was truly about the girl, the mom would have been there spending time and money on getting her the help she needed to pass the test. Just maybe that would have made her feel valued enough to keep from getting knocked up, too... just saying.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238652 on May 30, 2008 at 10:36 a.m.

in response to 250840

I agree with your comment "the fact that there are a lot of students who would rather be spoonfed and memorize rather than to actually learn something." Most students these days want everything given to them instead of earn it.

The TAKS test is based not just on what you know, but it requires the students to use higher level thinking skills to solve their answers. Yes , the questions and problems are simple, but they set the question/problem in a way that the student must think, set up, and solve the problems for the answers.

Teaching to the test does not help the students it is the reason why a lot of students would rather be "spoonfed" instead of learning. This a good reason why students are losing the valuable thinking skills, which is the reason why the are failing the TAKS.

Yes, I agree that the test does not prove how smart or good of a student your child is, but until the state changes its policy one must abide by it.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710197 on May 30, 2008 at 10:37 a.m.

in response to 710826

LOL!!! are you really expecting a lawyer to make an ethical choice over and above money! What planet are you from ?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 298842 on May 30, 2008 at 10:40 a.m.

in response to 712045

Post 045....my sympathies on the loss of your daughter.

You are Right On with your post.....the student who failed five times does not know what painful really is to be acting the way she is about all of this.
If she is telling the truth about her graduatinion class is family to her, then she will attend the ceremony.
Whoever said life was supposed to be easy.
It isn't.
She needs to learn to roll with it, but then with a mother like this girl has, she does not have much of a chance.

The Judge made absolutely the right decision in this matter.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 250840 on May 30, 2008 at 10:42 a.m.

in response to 242439

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Go back and read my post again. I think I make a pretty clear point--if you want to go to college, you must first graduate from HS or get a GED. In order to graduate from a HS in Texas, you must pass the TAKS. Therefore, you DO need to pass the TAKS in order to go to college. It's not a "requirement" in the sense that a school will not ask you for it in order to be considered for admission--it's a given. You have to have passed it in order to graduate, and you have to graduate in order to enroll in college. If A and B, then C. Simple logic. The person I responded to said colleges don't require it, and they do--they just don't ask for it because if you graduate, you have passed it. You see what I'm saying now?

I, too, enrolled in college in 1999 and didn't even have to worry about the TASP because I knocked out the TAAS the first time my sophomore year. Honors edumacation going to work!

The TAAS was a piece of cake, which is why I didn't even have to take the TASP--I was exempt based on my TAAS score. I was trying to make the point to the other honors student that yes, the test is a joke because of how easy it is, not because someone couldn't pass it and wants to bend the rules.

I agree with you 100% about having to take similar tests to get into college (SAT, ACT). The THEA is just a placement test, but if you score high enough on the SAT, ACT, or the TAKS, you won't have to take the THEA. If they can't pass the TAKS--a piece-of-cake-joke-of-a-test--they will be in some serious trouble when/if they try to go go to college.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710826 on May 30, 2008 at 10:42 a.m.

in response to 710197

"LOL!!! are you really expecting a lawyer to make an ethical choice over and above money! What planet are you from ?"

Answers....YES......JUPITER
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 443928 on May 30, 2008 at 10:42 a.m.

that girl is not marion luna brem's grandaughter. she is dahlia's daughter and she is just married to ms. brem's son her last name is garcia remember
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329836 on May 30, 2008 at 10:46 a.m.

Does anyone know how many times she actually took the test? Did she exhaust all 5 chances?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 363309 on May 30, 2008 at 10:52 a.m.

to 710197,, 710826

Kudos to 710197.

As for 710826...spoken just like a MAN !

You must be the most "Moral" lawyer out there if you would not have taken this case. Too bad Mrs. Brem did not consult with you first.
We could have avoided all of this fun.

LOL
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 232590 on May 30, 2008 at 10:52 a.m.

I just want to say I couldn’t believe that Brem took this to court. No one has done this since we’ve had this policy; because I think we all agree that if you don’t pass the TAKS you don’t graduate. If this were me I wouldn’t have gone this far she just brought attention to herself and her pregnant daughter. I would have been embarrassed because everyone would be thinking what I am thinking. Uhhh she’s pregnant!! She should have been studying instead of doing other things. Don’t worry Brem you can still throw a big old party for her “A BABY SHOWER”!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 250840 on May 30, 2008 at 10:52 a.m.

in response to 242439

My bad. I misread who you responded to and was like, "Why am I being attacked?" ha ha! Thank goodness there's no aptitude test required before posting!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 237163 on May 30, 2008 at 10:56 a.m.

Shame on the parents!

Any caring parent would get some help for their child so that they could pass the test.

Wonder if this runs in their family?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 11:07 a.m.

Let's see...

18 years old, married, most likely due to preggo, and living under some else's roof for free. Cannot pass a simple test after 5 attempts.

Get ready to support her and her child if and when the trough runs dry from the mother in law.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 359472 on May 30, 2008 at 11:07 a.m.

in response to 239763

Another idiot ! What school were you an honor student? HIGH School of Retards that can spell thought. Read your second sentence. In addition in order to get into a community college one must pass THEA test or take remedial classes that give you no credits before you can begin college courses.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 329691 on May 30, 2008 at 11:07 a.m.

You people out there are being so vicious. This article is about TAKS not whether this girl is pregnant or whether Marion Luna Brem is her stepgrandmother. The majority of you are being so judgemental because it's so easy when you're on the outside looking in. It's grand that your children have passed the TAKS but not all children are good testers whether they prepare themselves physically or mentally. Remember John Kennedy, Jr. had trouble passing his law exam and he took it several times. Remember it could be anyone of you in this situation right now. But, one thing these parents should not have done was to prepare for a celebration without knowing whether their children would ace the test.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 359472 on May 30, 2008 at 11:13 a.m.

in response to 234573

Very well said. A++++ for the best comment and advice.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 11:14 a.m.

This story gets better by the minute...now she is married and pregnant? Is this all true or is this speculation? Wow...my advice to her would be close legs and open book!! She might not be in this situation right now of total humiliation!!! LOL
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 11:23 a.m.

in response to 232590

LOL!!! She could have two parties in one in August...Graduation Party and a Baby Shower!! Now that is something to be proud of!!! :)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 705049 on May 30, 2008 at 11:26 a.m.

The mom should not have put the kid through this. She could have used this as a valuable life lesson and probably could have used the situation to spark some motivation. Not now.....The mom has screwed up big time.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 230598 on May 30, 2008 at 11:30 a.m.

WOW! I wonder if the mother or daughter is reading any of this?
She really opened up a can of worms!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712060 on May 30, 2008 at 11:34 a.m.

in response to 329691

I think everyone is frustrated about how much of a waste of tax payers money this circus was. If you are willing to take some of our hard earned money on frivolous law suits, the prepare for the wrath of the public. Dispite the obvious differences between this girl and John F. Kenedy, JFK didn't blame the test or the people who wrote the test. He failed, tried harder, and passed.

This is the message Mrs. Brem should be giving to her daughter. Hard Work = Result. The message she is giving her daughter is sue if you don't get what you want.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 239291 on May 30, 2008 at 11:40 a.m.

Looks like some folks actually "get it!?" Hands down those saying "No" are speaking!

Polls

Should students who don’t pass the TAKS be allowed to walk at graduation?

Yes 19% 338 votes
No 80% 1367 votes
1705 total votes
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 703486 on May 30, 2008 at 11:51 a.m.

Sorry to hear the bad news. CCISD (King) must be doing something correct. My son passed the test in 2006 with a perfect score. This year my daughter (Kaffie) passed writing portion with a 4 and missed one in the math portion everything else was correct. Study habits begin at home. I am not a professional educator and am not wealthy and can’t afford tutoring. Start paying a tutor and begin studying daily.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 325797 on May 30, 2008 at 11:55 a.m.

in response to 409487

TAKS- T E X A S Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. how can you take the TAKS is in another state when it is made for TEXAS? each state has mandated tests to be administered to the students, but only TAKS is taken in Texas.

some schools do allow the student who passed academically to walk across the stage, even though they did not pass the TAKS test. they receive a blank piece of paper in their envelope.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 248235 on May 30, 2008 at 11:55 a.m.

fyi: Mrs. Brem's post ID is 448869. Let's see if she adds any comments as she did on the closet snoop.

Two times now, she has made herself look like a fool. I just read the closet snoop feature on her and I must say I have never met the lady but she made herself look like such a materialistic gold digger. It is sad when one has to brag of the things they buy to make themselves look good because obviously she is an ugly person on the inside. So she compensates by bragging about what she has. I pity her.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 700805 on May 30, 2008 at 11:57 a.m.

Let's not the forget all the Seniors that are walking across the stage this weekend.

Great Job Guys. May the Lord guide you in your next stepping stone in life.

Way to go Class of 2008
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711811 on May 30, 2008 at 11:59 a.m.

If you go to the website of kristv.com you can see that she is pregnant. Now you see why she hasn't been able to pass the TAKS test. She was busy thinking of boys and the mall that no studies were put towards the test. She probably thought that its just a joke about the test. But now she will be known as the student that didn't pass the test and didn't pass in court. Students need to take this test seriously. What the parent should have done was help her daughter gather materials that would help her pass the test in the summer. You will also notice how she was wanting to be seen on TV then the verdict was in and she was hiding of shame.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 448869 on May 30, 2008 at 11:59 a.m.

I wonder if any of you bloggers are actually reading this? Look at all the misspelled words...CC has something to be proud of. A bunch of idiots that can't spell! You must not have taken the TAKS test.

This wasn't a lawsuit!!! It was in injunction!! And it wasn't about this one girl, it was about a group of kids and their parents.

Does anybody know for a fact that the girl didn't get tutoring? It sounds like a whole bunch of jeolous envious people. So the family has money....BIG FREAKIN DEAL!!!

Ms Dalia Brem teaches my student at Driscoll Middle School, devotes her time to helping the students of lower income schools. Is anyone writing about that??? Ugh NO!!!

If anyone of us bloggers were in their shoes we would have done the exact same thing
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 703755 on May 30, 2008 at noon

22 years later i can still se the faces on the party boys, with tears in their eyes after finding that they wouldn't be graduating. they chose to skip school, forget about studying, and drank like fish every weekend. the dedicated students knew it would happen and they had no pity, they just smiled and shook their heads. someone said that the other students could care less if you walked on stage our not, and they are right. we reached our goals, that's what the failures get for having that retarded attitude.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 248235 on May 30, 2008 at 12:11 p.m.

there she is look above this post a bit. now she is trying to act as if she is someone else! LOL!

nice try!

It is sad that no one can say nice things about you so you make lies about yourself as you did at 11:59 a.m.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 410913 on May 30, 2008 at 12:19 p.m.

I am a 2006 grad. Most of the TAKS tests were very basic skills and all student should be able to pass these tests. I did have a problem with the science test, but was able to pass all sections the first time. The questions on the science test were often material not covered in the classroom, but many of the questions were common sense. The valedictorian of my class failed her science the first time around. I am now a Jr. in college and I believe these tests are a waste of time. The teachers are often too focused on getting their student to pass the TAKS when they should be preparing the student for college. When these children get older their furture employers are not going to be looking at their TAKS scores but rather their Degree.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711837 on May 30, 2008 at 12:21 p.m.

Way to go Judge Galvan!!!

The judge in this case clearly made the right decision. It is NOT a right to walk with your graduating class but A PRIVELAGE!! If this girl was given 5 opportunities to pass the TAKS and she could not succeed then she should NOT walk!!!

My niece is a high school student who is in the 10th grade and she failed the Science portion of the TAKS test. Now her guidance counsler has enrolled her into tutorials starting this up coming school year (2008-2009)..and she is furious!!! I told my brother that it is all good cause...because if you cant pass the TAKS then why should you have the privlage to walk??? Simple as that.

The point here is that this girl obviously didnt care nor did her mother other wise they would have put her in tutorials...not one word was mentioned that she had a tutor. So does this mean that since she did not pass the TAKS 5 times and not walk what is she gonna become?? A high school drop out??

If that is gonna be the case...get ready TAXPAYERS cause it will cost US a fortune when she enters the system...and when she has children well there you go...where will the cycle end??
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 298842 on May 30, 2008 at 12:36 p.m.

At least she has legs and can walk. Think about all the wheel chair students her age, chained for life due to some accident or illness. This girl needs to learn what life is all about.......and apparently her Ma and her GranMa Brem can only teach her about LAWYERS.

That attorney money would be better off spent on a tutor for her, or some education which she can understand, perhaps sex education if she really is in the family way right now. Who knows. She is not to be blamed.....this attitude was taught in the home.....she has a rough road ahead of her.

She doesn't knwo what real pain is if she said it would be too "painful" to go watch her classmates graduate and WALK across a Stage. Whoopee.......try going to a funeral instead and see what real pain is......

Get the priorities straight. Life is tough. Try a tour in Iraq.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 1:02 p.m.

in response to 448869

in response to 366811

I'm sorry, but no, if this was my child I would not have put her through this "embarrassment" of having the whole city of Corpus Christi knowing about her failure and commenting on this forum about it.

I would have told her there are many lessons to be learned by this and hopefully you will learn most of them this time and not have to repeat them several times before they sink in.

I would like for my child to be able to learn from my mistakes as I didn't take HS too seriously...had to get a GED because even though I was capable of getting the dipolma, just didn't apply myself like I should have. But, sometimes we have to learn these lessons first hand for them to register.

Sweetie ;-)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 1:03 p.m.

in response to 699260

(I had posted this on the other article, but it seemed fitting for this response too...plus I added a bit more...sorry if I bore those that have already read it.)

Sweetie ;-p
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 1:09 p.m.

in response to 448869

We don't care if it was a lawsuit or an Injunction...you still went to court over something so ignorant! Oh...and you're very wrong...NONE of us would have done the same thing!! If you can't pass the test after 5 times then you DO NOT deserve to be up there with every other hard working child that STUDIED so they could pass the test and walk across the stage! :)

If you are Mrs. Brem...the bloggers are not the ones who look stupid right now...incase you haven't read I'll enlighten you...YOU ARE!!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 232590 on May 30, 2008 at 1:18 p.m.

in response to 448869

I think you are wrong about every parent doing this, like I posted before no one has done this since we have had the policy. I certainly wouldn’t have taken it this far by going to court for it. We need to teach our children that nothing is given to them and that they have to work hard for things. When our children go to college grades aren’t given they are earned. I just hope parents that have children who are going to be Seniors this coming school year work hard with their children and tell them it’s important to pass the Taks test or you won’t graduate….Bottom line!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 424693 on May 30, 2008 at 1:21 p.m.

Honestly I don't think those kids who didn't pass the TAKS should be allowed to walk accross the stage.

From day one you go to school to learn and you are tested to see what you have learned. You may not remember everything you learned that year in first grade or in other grades after that but you are tested on something every year. You' re expected to do well or get held back or get into a speciallized program to help you in the future.

When you get to high school you take those state exams and you either pass... or fail and get help to pass the next year.

People who pass get to participate in extracuricular events, people who pass get to be on the honor roll list once in a while, people who pass get to prove their education meant more to them than their social life... people who pass excel.

Its sad the way this story turned into a real circus. What a shame.

The mother should now support her daughter and make sure she passes this test otherwise she'll just be giving up... then what is the point.

Sure graduation seems like a rite of passage but if you didn't put any work into it you can't very well expect to have the right to pretend like you did. It's not fair to those kids who did pass.

I'm sure some of the kids who did pass even struggled a bit but HELLO, they did it.

Good luck to all those 2008 GRADUATES... remember to study hard in college and pass those exams. We need more teachers and administrators out here to make sure no one gets caught up into the social side of high school.

Teachers are doing their job for the majority... those special few need some extra attention... lets work on that.

Peace!

I think my post followed all the rules.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 257135 on May 30, 2008 at 1:22 p.m.

in response to 448869

So because your kid is in a low income school, he/she deserves special attention? I'm afraid not. And us taxpayers are having to pay for your kid, so stop playing the "holier than though" routine.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 698482 on May 30, 2008 at 1:30 p.m.

in response to 448869

Quote: I wonder if any of you bloggers are actually reading this? Look at all the misspelled words...CC has something to be proud of. A bunch of idiots that can't spell! You must not have taken the TAKS test.
This wasn't a lawsuit!!! It was in injunction!! ... :End Quote

By the way, the sentence you wrote should have been "It was AN injunction!!"

Some people do have the ability to spell and check their grammar!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712045 on May 30, 2008 at 1:35 p.m.

in response to 448869

Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute...........are you telling us that Dalia Brem is a school teacher? Oh my, that makes this even worse cause obviously she was too busy teaching those lower income kids then her own. Then she was quoted as saying she didn't even know if she could pass the TAKS test.....that's even sadder. What is she teaching those lower income kids?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 1:36 p.m.

This sounds like someone should have at least been holding their child ACCOUNTABLE for her behavior and school performance, instead of hawking cars and rubbing elbows with her high-society friends.

Our kids know they will be held ACCOUNTABLE for ANY "C" grade or worse, thus all we see are A's and B's on their report cards.

Anything else, and they know that privileges will be susspended and/or restricted until the next grading period is completed.

We both work full time, but we always make sure that we are available every night to help ensure that the kids are being ACCOUNTABLE for themselves.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 277512 on May 30, 2008 at 1:38 p.m.

in response to 448869

In response to you 448869...NO, I wouldn't be trying to bail my child out of something they didn't put forth with full effort!!! I have 5 children two of which have gone through TAKS testing already through CCISD and you know...they have busted their hump to pass it! Thank God I have had no issues with them failing up to this point. If they were to fail and I knew they & myself had not given it 100% effort I would not be taking it to a judge to try and override the rules! What a public humiliation!!! It's called "pay the consequences for your actions or non-actions!" THAT'S LIFE....they need to know that and understand that now!!! And what an embarresment if this girl really is pregnant...dragging her out in public like that thinking because you flashed your big bucks and big bucktooth smile that you would fanagle your way out of it!!!! What kind of lesson is that to a child who is getting ready to head out to the real world adn possibly be in charge of a human life herself?!?!? GEEZ, then we wonder why this generation of kids are SO MESSED UP!!!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 1:39 p.m.

in response to 698482

LMAO!! So..448869...we are not as stupid as you think we are? Incase you never read the blogs...you should never get on here and talk about how people spell! You will without fail (sound familiar) misspell something in your own sentence and feel like a complete idiot!! :)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711512 on May 30, 2008 at 1:42 p.m.

If you want to walk, try EARNING THE RIGHT.

Why is this so difficult for people to understand?

A graduation ceremony is for people who have graduated -- not to help non-graduates feel like they "fit in" with their peers.

Life is a series of tests. If you don't pass, you don't participate.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238420 on May 30, 2008 at 1:43 p.m.

in response to 335574

Are you sure she is in family way......
or just more mean wishing......
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235037 on May 30, 2008 at 1:50 p.m.

Wow … Sometimes it’s shocking to see someone who feels entitled slapped down to size … I haven’t felt this pleased about justice since Paris Hilton was sent to jail TWICE.

It’s also shocking to see so many people on here who want to minimize the graduation ceremony just to make a spoiled brat feel good. I think she would feel better if she would have just worked harder to pass the test. I don’t believe for one minute that real honor students are failing a basic skills test that they have five chances to pass … BS.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 1:50 p.m.

in response to 712045

First, let me say that I am so sorry for your loss. I can't even begin to imagine losing a child.

Second, thank you for calling a spade a spade. Mrs. Brem is teaching her child that she should expect to be handed something that she did not earn. If her friends at school are her family, then she should go and show her friends that she has the character and respect to congratulate them even in the face of her own failure. She should brush herself off, put on some lipstick, and go pass that test. This will build character for her.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 1:58 p.m.

in response to 239763

Exactly what reputable college did you go to that didn't require entrance exams, a passing TAKS score, or the SAT?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 246009 on May 30, 2008 at 1:58 p.m.

I agree with others...It was pretty obvious that the purse was to "try" to hide her stomach? Things that make you go hmm????

Nothing wrong with dreaming, but for her to really think she looks like Eva Longoria...Is this a joke, you have got to be kidding!!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 415233 on May 30, 2008 at 2:01 p.m.

"I wonder if any of you bloggers are actually reading this? Look at all the misspelled words...CC has something to be proud of. A bunch of idiots that can't spell! You must not have taken the TAKS test.

This wasn't a lawsuit!!! It was in injunction!! And it wasn't about this one girl, it was about a group of kids and their parents.

Does anybody know for a fact that the girl didn't get tutoring? It sounds like a whole bunch of jeolous envious people. So the family has money....BIG FREAKIN DEAL!!!"

Uh, you spelled 'jealous' wrong. LOL!

If this IS about a group of kids AND their parents, then shame on all of THOSE parents! If this little girl wasn't getting tutored for the TAKS test, she should have at least been educated on "safe sex" practices.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712060 on May 30, 2008 at 2:01 p.m.

in response to 448869

I think you are wrong when you say we would have done the same thing.

A while back, I was in the high school band. I was too caught up in other things and let my grades slip. Before we began to practice, our band director called out names of students who were ask to please stand infront of the entire band. My name was one of the names called out and I thought I won an award or something. Wrong! I was in the group of kids who failed a class for that six weeks and we were told how we let the rest of the band down and how we won't be needed. Was this called for? No! Was this embarrassing? YES!!! I told my parents about it and their response was, "well I hope you learned your lesson." Boy did I. I studied my butt off and never earned a grade below a B during my junior and senior year. And yes, I did pass the TASP and GRE to enter graduate school.

Its all about accountability.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710826 on May 30, 2008 at 2:04 p.m.

in response to 246009

"Nothing wrong with dreaming, but for her to really think she looks like Eva Longoria...Is this a joke, you have got to be kidding!!!!"

What, you couldn't tell the resemblance, after all they both have long hair........
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 2:09 p.m.

in response to 262348

Some schools will waive entrance exams for people with a high school deploma aged 30 or more.

Not tyring to be a buttinski -- just saying...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 304872 on May 30, 2008 at 2:10 p.m.

in response to 283478

Don't even go there Aransas County schools are a joke my son graduated and he even knows he was passed year after year because of learning disabilities. I was promised he would be college material and they would help him get there another big joke I was called the same day scholarship forms were due to say OH we forgot to talk to your son but he isn't going to college is he? Well yes he had planned to until then his dream was squashed by administrators who only care about the rich or 4.0 student not any others why do you think we have such low self esteem among these kids here in Aransas County and only want to get pregnant no one gives them any hope. When we do get teachers who care we loose them because they are too busy caring. I was an active parent in every aspect of this school district for 13 years have seen it all and heard it all maybe its time the school board really open their ears and listen to the students and teachers.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 277128 on May 30, 2008 at 2:14 p.m.

Good call judge! 5 times and still failed, come on!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 2:18 p.m.

in response to 329691

Comparing the BAR to the TAKS is like comparing apples to oranges. Get a clue. I asked my ninth grader about the TAKS. He said it was so simple that he was commended!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 233544 on May 30, 2008 at 2:20 p.m.

to 448869...if she was truly a great teacher then she of all people should have been able to enforce her daughter to study and pass the TAKS test one of the 5 times.
But apparently as per her closet snoop she's too busy shopping for herself. So...instead of teaching her daughter the basics she taught her how to shop. So...surprise...she failed...and now she wants sympathy??? UGH...NO!!!
To Delia...close your wallet for a second and teach your daughter if your such a great and wonderful teacher.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 246009 on May 30, 2008 at 2:26 p.m.

710826

LOL
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 2:26 p.m.

in response to 448869

"If anyone of us bloggers were in their shoes we would have done the exact same thing"

Uhhh, no. Mrs. Brem. What we are telling you here is that we would not. Not only did I have one child fail the TAKS, BECAUSE OF HIS POOR STUDY HABITS, I took away his luxury items (cell phone, etc.) and I made his butt study. When he failed a class in school, I made his butt go to summer school instead of on summer vacation. Did I like seeing my son miss out? No! Of course not! But, I knew I would not be doing my job as a parent if I didn't make him face the consequences of his own actions. I am proud to report that he is doing well, and he survived.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 709419 on May 30, 2008 at 2:27 p.m.

in response to 287001

Look at G.W. Bush.... what an idiot he turned out to be. But, by golly he passed the tests and walked the stage didn't he? One look at how Bush used his education and you can see just how stupid tests really are!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 2:38 p.m.

Today's "Peanuts" reminded me of this story...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 2:39 p.m.

in response to 235933

No, no, I understand what you are saying. Waivers such as those are for the non-traditional student. These are not mere fledglings just entering life or school, these are experienced adults who have been working for a while or have been in the military earning college credit through their extensive training. However, to get into college period, you must have a HS diploma or a GED, and for that, you have to pass tests. The traditional student will have to pass entrance exams, especially if they want to go to a reputable, accredited college.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712812 on May 30, 2008 at 2:46 p.m.

in response to 448869

"does anybody know for a fact that the girl didn't get tutoring?"
well, do you know for a fact she did? and if she did, i hope she has a receipt for what she paid....
"it sounds like a whole bunch of jeolous envious people"
are you kidding me?!?! jeolous or envious of WHAT??? believe me, they have NOTHING to be jeolous or envious about.
"if anyone of us bloggers were in their shoes we would have done the exact same thing"
that is a big lie.....NEVER speak for anyone else....especially when most bloggers are for the ruling. by the looks of the postings, most parents are all for being responsible, not entitled.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238652 on May 30, 2008 at 2:49 p.m.

in response to 709419

LOL!!!! But you forgot to include the people who voted for him not once but twice! I bet they took some form of a standardized test too.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 415233 on May 30, 2008 at 2:49 p.m.

in response to 448869

Uhhh, you misspelled "jealous".....LOL!

If this IS only about a group of kids AND their parents, then shame on THOSE parents!!! They should have taken away their cell phones and get them off of MySpace.com!!

5 times?? 5 TIMES????? S-T-U-D-Y!!!

If this girls mom IS a teacher, then that just makes this all the more embarrassing! At least by the third failure you would think the parents would have noticed! Jeez!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 353207 on May 30, 2008 at 2:57 p.m.

to 448869

You mispelled jealous. You spelled it jeolous. How funny!
I looked you up on the closet snoop and you are post 448869 (Dalia Brem).

Good try.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 3:03 p.m.

in response to 353207

Where are y'all finding the closet snoop? Is it on this web-site or are y'all going to some where else?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 372713 on May 30, 2008 at 3:05 p.m.

in response to 448869

In 1991, we were subjected to the TAAS test. I was an honors student at a local high school and a number of us failed the writing portion of the exam. We all took the required remedial course, without filing an injunction, and all passed and were allowed to graduate. I was in this class with students with prominent, well-to-do parents who could have coddled us the way Ms. Brem is coddling her daughter. Thankfully, that was not the case.

It is wonderful if Ms. Brem indeed is a teacher who helps lower income schools. If that is the case, however, why could she not find the time to help her own daughter prepare for this very important exam? If I were in her shoes, I would require my own daughter to attend the ceremony to see what she could have done, had she only applied herself a little more diligently.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 3:11 p.m.

For anyone who would like to see the Closet Snoop article:

http://www.caller.com/news/2007/jun/2...

Sweetie ;-p
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 342632 on May 30, 2008 at 3:12 p.m.

Chuck Norris could have passed that test in Kindergarten.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 3:20 p.m.

in response to 342632

I didn't know that Kindergarten existed when Carlos was a child during the Civil War...

LOL!
Sweetie ;-D
(Sorry, I couldn't help myself)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699874 on May 30, 2008 at 3:21 p.m.

I can't believe this mother thought it was ok to humiliate her daughter in court and on the news. Let's tell all the world what a failure she is.... the mother only served to humiliate herself in the process in addition to her daughter.

It's a shame the mother did not spend more time enforcing her study habits. Perhaps if Mom had been a good parent, the daughter would not be in the "situation" she got herself into, both scholastically and physically.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 447776 on May 30, 2008 at 3:23 p.m.

I'm a teacher in CCISD and with all the stress we are put under for these students to pass TAKS I am thrilled that the district and the Judge didn't back down on this. We get displaced, reprimanded, have our jobs threatened all because of a test.....that we don't even take. We rely on these students passing to keep our jobs. If they let this little brat walk, it would make it even harder for us to motivate our students. You can't even call this lady a parent. All she is is a baby factory. Hopefully the county will charge her for the court costs so taxpayers won't have to. She can obviously afford it.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 592398 on May 30, 2008 at 3:26 p.m.

IF you go to closet snoop and read the comments - it seems as though 448869 is Dalia Brem. Thats why she is defending herself there as well as here. LOL

Dalia the majority of posters disagree with what you did.

Have a great weekend.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 3:30 p.m.

in response to 269644

"What about the things that should be taught for the real world? The real math and science and language that we need to survive in the REAL world. Here we are bickering and insulting a girl who cannot pass the TAKS but what about those that do and still make sh*t of themselves. Don't judge until your a** is in that situation!!!"

1. It is up to the parents to teach their children about the real world.
2. Most of us are not insulting that child. We are insulting her mother. Get your facts straight.
3. Nice language. You can't refrain long enough to make a comment and find more intelligent words?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 415233 on May 30, 2008 at 3:33 p.m.

in response to 269644

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you, the daughter.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 3:35 p.m.

in response to 415233

ROFL! Good eye!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 698252 on May 30, 2008 at 3:38 p.m.

in response to 296404

Not all special ed kids are exempt from TAKS. My daughter, who is classified as special ed, had a hard time passing the Math part of the TAKS. She did it after 3 times and she is graduating on the recommended program. She was giving the option of graduating on the minimum program without taking the TAKS, but she said she didn't want to be special. She wanted to graduate on the recommended program, which included the full TAKS testing. We are proud of her for not wanting to take the easy way out.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 3:39 p.m.

in response to 262348

Oooo...looks like 269644 got themselves banned...one minute they were there and the next they were not...

See, there are lessons to be learned everyday...The lesson I from this is to watch your language or CT may just ban you from their site. My mother always said that people who feel the need to use foul language don't have much of a vocabulary...or much intelligence...

Sweetie ;-)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 3:42 p.m.

in response to 699260

LOL! I should proof-read more...that should read:

"...The lesson I LEARNED from this..."

Sorry,
Sweetie ;-p
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 3:43 p.m.

in response to 698252

That's really wonderful. Congratulations to your daughter for a job well done. Ms. Garcia should really be ashamed of herself for all of her whining.

Oh, 269644: Now I am referring to the girl who did not pass her TAKS.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 3:45 p.m.

in response to 699260

Yes, Sweetie, I agree. If we have a thought, we should be able to express it on a public forum without the use of profanity.

But, I wasn't the one who suggested removal.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 3:48 p.m.

in response to 699260

Thank you Sweetie! Wow...that little article has made things even worse for her. Honestly...if I was her I would be moving. I don't think her snobby ways are welcome in this city any longer.

Seriously...Eva Longoria??? Really....
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711877 on May 30, 2008 at 3:48 p.m.

He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword. He who lives by Chuck Norris, dies by the roundhouse kick. ~AP
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 3:49 p.m.

in response to 698252

She wanted to graduate on the recommended program, which included the full TAKS testing. We are proud of her for not wanting to take the easy way out.

698252

It is apparent that she was taught about certain values. The kind that are typically taught at home by responsible parents.

Congratulations to your daughter.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 415233 on May 30, 2008 at 3:50 p.m.

in response to 708377

I know, I've met Eva Longoria, and she is NO Eva Longoria!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 230598 on May 30, 2008 at 3:52 p.m.

KrisTV does have the video of these 2 spoiled brats coming out of the court room and you can pause it when the daughter is putting the purse up to her face and guess what??? There is a round tummy!!! Oh boy, what could that be????

And as far as the closet snoop, "She DOES NOT look like Eva Longoria"
One is skinny and one is fatter!

And so the mother is a teacher and her daughter failed a test 5 five times what does that tell you!

Driscoll Jr High needs to be careful of what she may act like she is teaching those kids there. That's like hearing about these teachers messing with a student!

I cannot believe how crazy this is, to embarrass your child and yourself and family like that, not alone the school she teaches at!
And she is trying to speak for others.
What a siko!!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 415233 on May 30, 2008 at 3:53 p.m.

in response to 235933

+1

KUDOS to your daughter!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 3:54 p.m.

in response to 262348

Oh, I wasn't suggesting you suggest removal of the comment...

I think it takes more than one person to get a comment removed and I'm thinking it takes a lot of removed comments for you to get banned...

That's not to say that I can't swear with the best...and in three languages at that! LOL!

Sweetie ;-p
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 262348 on May 30, 2008 at 3:57 p.m.

in response to 699260

LOL, sorry, I wasn't saying you were accusing me! I was just throwing it out there in case anyone thought I did.

I'm no snob, I can swear with the best of them, too, just not in 3 languages. (ROFL) My point is that there is a place for everything and a public forum is not one of them.

Have a nice one!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 353207 on May 30, 2008 at 4:01 p.m.

Reply to this Post | Suggest removal Posted by 448869 on July 6, 2007 at 10:44 a.m.
Perhaps you should check my background. then you would see that I made my money by having brains and skills. The fact that I married a man that has strong financial ties has nothing

The above is from the comment section of the closet snoop posted by 448869
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:04 p.m.

in response to 448869

Quote from Dalia herself :

wonder if any of you bloggers are actually reading this? Look at all the misspelled words...CC has something to be proud of. A bunch of idiots that can't spell! You must not have taken the TAKS test.
This wasn't a lawsuit!!! It was in injunction!! And it wasn't about this one girl, it was about a group of kids and their parents.
Does anybody know for a fact that the girl didn't get tutoring? It sounds like a whole bunch of jeolous envious people. So the family has money....BIG FREAKIN DEAL!!!
Ms Dalia Brem teaches my student at Driscoll Middle School, devotes her time to helping the students of lower income schools. Is anyone writing about that??? Ugh NO!!!
If anyone of us bloggers were in their shoes

-you just made a total you know what out of yourself. I know this is your blogger id number from the closet snoop you posted on. My goodness....I feel so bad for the real Brem family. Marion..this so called daughter in law is making your name look very bad.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 264477 on May 30, 2008 at 4:04 p.m.

in response to 448869

I think it is very admirable that Dalia Brem devotes her time to helping students in the lower income schools. I applaud her. It's a shame that she could not do the same for her own daughter. That may possibly be due to the fact that her daughter does not live with her and never has. Dalia left her daughter to the girls father and his mother to raise. Dalia herself was pregnant in high school possibly at the same age as her daughter. I find it so amusing how those who do not take an active interest with their own flesh and blood at home yet are there to help others. This is all done for a social status and not for anything else. I know Dalia personally and I also know her husband and I know that her helping others is not because she truly cares. It is all done to look better to the community.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 353207 on May 30, 2008 at 4:05 p.m.

Posted by 448869 on July 6, 2007 at 10:44 a.m.
Perhaps you should check my background. then you would see that I made my money by having brains and skills. The fact that I married a man that has strong financial ties has nothing to do with it. Unless you live in my home you don't have a clue about our lives.

Didnt copy/paste the entire post from the closet snoop. Here you go.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 4:10 p.m.

in response to 698252

I want to congratulate you on rearing such as principled and conscientious daughter! You must be so proud! Her graduation is truly inspiring!

Sweetie ;-)
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 708377 on May 30, 2008 at 4:15 p.m.

in response to 702497

I completely agree with you. If I was Marion I would disown her as my Daughter-In-Law and I would make that very clear to the public. I feel sorry for the Brem family. I think their name has been slung through the mud and it is close to being buried because of Delia.

She can take her "Rolex" and her pregnant daughter and go some where else!! I read in another post that she didn't even take care of her daughter while she was growing up. Is she just trying to buy her love now? It is all very sad!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 264477 on May 30, 2008 at 4:18 p.m.

in response to 448869

The fact of the matter is it truly makes no difference whether Dalia has money or not, married into money or just using the Brem name. The fact is that Dalia felt that her daughter deserved to walk across that stage when she did not earn the right to. Walking across the stage is reserved for those who truly earned the right to, no one absolutely no one should be granted the priviledge to walk across the stage with out having earned the right to. No one is jealous or envious, everyone feels that Dalia used the Brem name to grant her daughter the right to do something that she did not deserve, that she did not earn; going public only made herself open to all the harsh comments that she is now receiving. If Dalia's daughter did study and yet still failed the test 5 times, then obviously there is a learning disability that should have been caught long before this, or she may have had not paid any attention at all. Regardless of that, it is a shame that Dalia decided to embarrass herself, her daughter and the Brem's by going to the extreme she did when there were so many other routes to have taken way before all of this occurred. The Closet Snoop's article only made Dalia seem like a self centered person due to the fact that she named so many of her prized possessions and things she loved the most.....none mentioned were her daughter. That is sad and unfortunately shows everyone what is truly in her heart.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:21 p.m.

Again:

Poster 448869 is Dalia Brem everybody!!

It just goes to show what this woman will do to get her way. Deception and lies and she just proved it on here.

In closet snoop she left a post counter attacking other posters. Her id is 448896. Go and check it out. Then she has the audacity to come on here and post using the same ID number and pretend about who she is. LMAO!!! No wonder her daughter failed. She is a liar and choses to live her life as one. Including to make King High School let her daughter walk the stage to fool others that she really graduated.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 707626 on May 30, 2008 at 4:22 p.m.

in response to 699260

Hahah, very nice. That was great. We love ya sweetie!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 239763 on May 30, 2008 at 4:23 p.m.

Damn sweetie, you've got too much time on your hands! Do you work?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:26 p.m.

LMAO..she says she made her money from her brains and skills. OMG!! This is hysterical. Maybe she needs to see a psychologist for pretending to be someone on this thread and herself on another thread. It sounds like she made her money from lies. She obviously doesn't have any brains and her skills are not up to par here. IF she was smart she would not have posted on here pretending to be a parent of a student of hers and expect for nobody on here to research her ID number.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 704275 on May 30, 2008 at 4:27 p.m.

Post 409487....your child did not take the TAKS in another state. The acronym TAKS stands for TEXAS Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. Each state DOES have mandatory exams, but they are called different things in different states. They are also not as strenuous and not required to pass from grade to grade in some states.....I'm also former miitary w/chldren.....and a Texas teacher.
My 3rd grader did not take or have to pass the TAKS in another state. He took another exam that measured multiple academic areas. It was not required to pass 3rd grade.
The fact remains that some people are smart, but not good test takers. We are also smart and gifted in a multitude of ways. Just because a person is not smart in English or Math doesn't mean the person is an overall failure.
I do have to side with the school distirct in the matter of not allowing the students to walk the stage. I do not see what harm it would do though to allow those who do not meet graduation requirements to sit in a group and be recognized as a group as "Summer Graduates" or "Pending Graduates"....or whatever politically correct "sensitive" title they can come up with. Even if they have a graduation ceremony at the end of the summer, it won't be the same.
Judges are not in the business of siding with people on emotions. The JUDGE weighs policy and Constitutional Rights etc. ....FACTS, NOT OPINIONS. I hope I am never in this situation, but at the same time I have taught my own children that "rules are rules"....like it or not!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 289279 on May 30, 2008 at 4:28 p.m.

From the high school kids my teenager has talked to, those who didnt pass the taks test are not going to college or at least wont be getting their papers ready for entrance in fall. So this test is an examination of what you know even though you have completed your credits and passed ALL your classes? Doesnt make sense. All emphasis now is on passing this test and some students are even copying. If my son or daughter cannot pass one of these test someone teaching them is at fault as well. How can they learn unless someone teaches them???????Responsibility falls on the teachers and the parents and the students. Now how are we going to fail all three???????????????????
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.

in response to 264477

Poster 448869 just fooled you. That is Dalia Brem talking about herself and gloating about what a good teacher she is to "lower income" children so she can look good.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 235933 on May 30, 2008 at 4:32 p.m.

You cannot put the toothpaste back into the tube once squeezed out.

Lesson to be learned?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 232590 on May 30, 2008 at 4:35 p.m.

in response to 702497

OMG!! You are right!! Now that's smart, I wouldn't have known that. She's been caught trying to be someone else. Great detective work.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:36 p.m.

This is not about the TAKS test but about a woman that wants to cheat the system for her daughter.

My nephew is dyslexic and has other learning disabilities. The district did not allow any alterations for him to take the TAKS and he still passed. He studied hard and was determined to do good. We are so proud of him and look forward to seeing him walk across the stage.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699260 on May 30, 2008 at 4:37 p.m.

in response to 239763

Already been through this, but again...

Yes, I do work. As a matter of fact I am at work now. Part of my job is to update employees about "the world outside" during the day, hence why I am here Monday through Friday between the hours of 9am to 5pm. If you are reading the CT comments often enough you will see that I am rarely here after 5pm, weekends or "bank" holidays.

Maybe it seems like I'm "here all the time" because I (almost) always sign my posts where quite a few other posters do not.

Lastly, (sarcasm ahead) thank you for making this about me, my favorite subject...LOL!!! (Sorry, I couldn't help myself!)

Sweetie ;-p
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 709419 on May 30, 2008 at 4:37 p.m.

in response to 238652

Yeah, idiots too,.... for sure.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712664 on May 30, 2008 at 4:38 p.m.

448869
you've been identified by your id#. it's linked to the closet snoop article.

the best thing to do is to step away.....refocus your attention on the task at hand.

don't come back to this story and respond, it will only consume you with anger.

internet anonymity (or perceived anonymity) brings out the worst in people. don't fall for the trap.

good luck.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:41 p.m.

Sweetie...don't worry about it. You are a delight to have on here. You are also quick witted and smart and have been able to point out several things that I have overlooked and had to go back and check for myself.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 4:45 p.m.

What 448869 needs to do is get off the computer and focus on "teaching" her daughter how to pass the TAKS instead of public relations and the media.

I wonder if Marion will continue to have her appear on commercials.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 242439 on May 30, 2008 at 4:49 p.m.

Sure glad I'm not subscribed to Time Warner - I don't have to see those blasted Love Chrysler commercials. I'm NEVER shopping there EVER again! HA!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 270301 on May 30, 2008 at 4:52 p.m.

I know that this lady has made a poor decision in judgement with her daughter's education, but these blogs and or comments are horrible. It is really a disgrace that humanity condones insults on ones looks, clothes, purses, etc. I am quite puzzeled why the Caller Times would even post half of these horrible things people are saying on their website. This behavior trait of insulting people is what is damaging all of society in all states. It kind of makes me think of the recent story involving myspace and the mother who poked fun at a young child causing herself to commit suicide. The Caller Times really should be careful of what they allow to be posted.

I in no way agree with what this woman did in the court system, but I do think what people are saying in regards to this closet snoop is horrible and people should be ashamed. Thou shall not judge.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712664 on May 30, 2008 at 5:03 p.m.

in response to 270301

welcome to the world wide web
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 5:06 p.m.

in response to 270301

Dalia brought this on herself by posting on here pretending to be someone else. You are telling us not to judge yet look at what she just did. We are angry that our loved ones studied hard on TAKS and then some wannabe snot wants the district to lie so her daughter can walk the stage and pretend to have graduated. There was no way any of us were going to let this down. People on here are mad and they are venting. Let them vent.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 459079 on May 30, 2008 at 5:13 p.m.

in response to 699260

But we've learned to love you anyway!

Yellowdog
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712045 on May 30, 2008 at 5:26 p.m.

in response to 699260

Sweetie, I want your job. lol
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710237 on May 30, 2008 at 5:34 p.m.

in response to 427774

I am also someone who doesn't agree with you, either. I have to say though that at one time I, too, felt sorry for these kids and felt they should be allowed to walk the stage and receive a blank diploma.

No more! Others have made their case very clear to me and I see how unfair this would be to not only to Khara but most importantly to the seniors who passed that TAKS.

I hope Lucy Rubio, Board Trustee, also reads the many blogs that show great support and clear thinking about this issue. She tends too much to side with parents in instances like this. But that is the politician in her. In the courtroom, she should have taken a neurtal stance but she sided and sat behind Mrs. D. Brem and her daughter. What a low blow to all parents of seniors and the seniors who passed the TAKS. What a low blow to the Board of Trustees to see her do this and such a lack of professionalism and loyalty to what has been entrusted to her. Once the Board voted and the vote was in favor of NOT allowing this girl and others like her to walk, she should have supported that vote no matter how she felt. I feel her smiling in the courtroom and where she sat was a slap in the face of all parents and their students who did pass the TAKS this year and in years past.

I hope all parents have learned, and students too, the seriousness of this test. It is imperative that parents give total support to students (and their teachers) when they show the first signs TAKS failure.

I know, firsthand now, that the high schools bend over backwards to give 100% support and more to see that these students pass the TAKS. Visit any high school campus and ask to see how they attack this issue with specialized programs aimed to help these particular students pass. All the students have to do is attend these sessions and work hard. Is that asking too much?

I urge Lucy Rubio to step over the line and see for herself how the schools in her district, for example, handle this issue. I think she will sing a different tune.

Hats off to all the seniors who worked hard, especially when the going got tough for some; hats off to their parents, the teachers and administrators in the high schools, and especially to Judge Galvan who did not allow himself to be pushed around by a big mouth and big money. And thank you, CCISD (Scott Elliff and the Board of Trustees) for standing up for what is right.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 375347 on May 30, 2008 at 5:39 p.m.

These students who did not pass the test all went to the same school and had the same teachers as those who did pass. I too took the test about 3 years ago when it was first introduced with the new science and history sections. I had no problem passing it the first time. Why? Because I went to class everyday, did my homework and studied. I was not top of my class nor was I close to it, but I passed it. Maybe we should look at these students grades and attendance records prior to taking the test.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710237 on May 30, 2008 at 5:52 p.m.

in response to 448869

You mean to tell me that this woman (Mrs. D. Brem) teaches in our school district AND responds to an issue like this for her daughter? Wow! I am left speechless.

Certainly, I would think that being a teacher she would be able to actually teach her daughter after school at home and on weekends to get her up to snuff for the test retakes. Wow, what an advantage Khara had that we didn't know about.

I wonder what this woman tells her students when they DON'T pass the TAKS in middle school? Parents, it is obvious that she doesn't care if your children pass or fail. Her principal needs to look at this very carefully because her attitude and what she did to her own daughter speaks volumes.

Also, I do not believe that you are a parent of a Driscoll student for very obvious reasons, one being the way you wrote what you did.

I agree with the posters who have traced you back to the Closet Snoop article where I also noted how you responded, quite ugly in your defense) to the bloggers. Now, you are doing the very same thing here. This is pretty pathetic

I think you need to give it a rest. Take your mother-in-law's money and take a trip to the Bahamas. Buy more clothes and one more fancy watch. You need to cool off and refocus...but please return in time to put Kahra into the sessions provided by the school district so she can take the TAKS test again and hopefully pass.

Marion Luna Brem...I hope you give your daughter-in-law a piece of your mind. Because of your past performance in being the professional, grace-filled, and hard working woman you are, I am sure you do not agree with all that has transpired. I want to assure you that none of us see this as a reflection on you.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 712841 on May 30, 2008 at 6:23 p.m.

She had a chance to pass the taks.... she should've listened all her high school years because she knew that junior year she had to pass. if she knew that she wasn't passing it her freshman or sophomore year she should've went to tutoring, done online taks test, bought the taks books that help out. Knowing her she was probably always partying and never paying attention. im glad she isn't walking the stage its her fault not no one else's but hers. The only reason she is embarassed is because her mom came out on the paper thinking she was all high class but regardless if your high class or not, if you don't pass the taks you dont graduate!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710237 on May 30, 2008 at 6:25 p.m.

in response to 270301

Hey, don't feel too sorry for D. Brem. She left herself wide open for all of this. She is old enough to know that when you create heat you have to also take the heat.

Understand that people are not going to stand for the way she has handled this whole thing. They are speaking out...loud and clear.

If something tragic happens to her daughter, it is only Mrs. Brem's fault. She is the mother from hell.

You think she has humility? You need to see her in Closet Snoop. No himility there but arrogance and flaunting her "new money." It is pretty pathetic to see a grown woman acting like that.

She is too much about herself and not enough about her daughter. This whole fiasco was more about her and not about her daughter and then in the end she drags the other Kings students. What a user.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711762 on May 30, 2008 at 6:37 p.m.

Well the world needs more people to work at Whataburger, Stripes, and so forth. I'm sure most of them didn't pass either, or she can work at her step grandmas dealership as a make ready washing cars.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 241547 on May 30, 2008 at 6:38 p.m.

in response to 270301

You posted this same post on the Closet SNOOT page.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 283478 on May 30, 2008 at 6:45 p.m.

\304872 Before you call Aransas schools a joke - look at your own writing. If your son is illiterate its because of parents like you who look to blame others but can't teach their child anything.

Learn how to write a complete sentence.

Learn the difference between LOSE and LOOSE. Let me help you. Your loose interpretation of the English Language has forced your son to lose any chance he had at learning to read or write at home.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 298842 on May 30, 2008 at 6:48 p.m.

What in the world is wrong with the mother of this student, putting her daughter thru something like this....and teaching her the way she has ....doesn't she know what real troubles are....not walking acrosss a stage and not getting to walk across a stage type thing.....try going to a funeral for a daughter in a car wreck.....that is troubles.......this mom is not giving her child the right lessons on life and responsibility.

I home the car dealer owner is not involved in any of this.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 303526 on May 30, 2008 at 7:04 p.m.

She is not a teacher she is the superintendant. Hey a lot of people are certainly stretching this story WAYYYY out of proportion. You know who you are? The story did not say one word about Marion Luna Brem nor did it mention that the girl was pregnant. I think based on some of these added reading between the lines insults that keep appearing, would suggest that the readers here would have a hard time passing a reading test of ANY KIND. Keep it real, and this is a mark on this community when a child failing is the hottest topic on this newspaper. What a crying shame. Selah!!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 248197 on May 30, 2008 at 7:17 p.m.

Wow, if she wasn't before, Marion Luna Brem must surely be embarrassed by her gold-digging DIL. And then she comes on here and pretends to be someone else, insults the people of Corpus Christi and then toots her own horn. Funny!

I've always had respect for Marion and always will. And it shouldn't, but Dalia's behavior reflects poorly on the family.

Too bad money can't buy class.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 337804 on May 30, 2008 at 8:46 p.m.

Just setting the record straight, Dalia Brem is NOT a teacher at Driscoll Middle School. She works with the Junior Achievement Program and speaks to students about, of all things, achieving in life. SHE IS NOT A TEACHER at Driscoll Middle School. Perhaps Junior Achievement should be aware of who represents them at CCISD schools! Think about that...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238181 on May 30, 2008 at 9:08 p.m.

in response to 246343

I wish your son luck and you should be proud!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 245502 on May 30, 2008 at 9:13 p.m.

A word of warning people..make no mention of the fact that she's Marion Luna Brem's step granddaughter..or they'll yank your post.

Grandma spends alot of advertising money with the CT,and here,the bucks trump free speech.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 362344 on May 30, 2008 at 9:33 p.m.

in response to 443928

thank you for clearing that up for me
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 388859 on May 30, 2008 at 9:53 p.m.

OMFG!! I just saw the KRIS video, and she is totally PREGGOS!!

It obviously shows a round belly, when she puts her purse on her face to hide the shame when walking out and losing once again!

And Dalia, or Delia, or whatever the heck your name is, you sound SOO freaking stupid when you are talking to the news, and trying to blame the judge for your daughter being dumb! I am embarassed for you! You should've kept your big pie hole shut, cuz you really sound dumb, and you teache?? Weird, I'm confused on that, cuz you surely don't sound educated at all.

Just wanna tell Marion Brem, mother in law, I can't believe you let your son marry a gold diggin, materialistic, person like that? I mean, there was a reason why she was still single! Well not sure how old she is, but if her daughter should be graduating she must've started having babies young too! Her precious daughter is taking after mama, and hoping she won't be a single mom, and maybe she too, will find some dummy to marry her and give her a good life instead of being a single mom and trying to find a baby daddy! Ha! Bet she ends up like mom, looking for a baby daddy or daddys when she gets a little older too! Hey maybe she will strike oil too!
Marion Luna Brem, you are a great lady, and you really shouldn't have your trash like this in your family!! It's waaay too embarassing for your son and your whole family!!
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 434089 on May 30, 2008 at 10:12 p.m.

I was so happy to see that the judge saw it the way it should have been.My son failed this test four times and on his last try three weeks before he was suppose to have the pleasure of walking the stage he finally passed it.He now lives in Colorado and a father to two wonderful boys he informed me that if the judge had ruled in her favor he would be in Corpus to protest something he had to work for.Congrads to all the graduates YOU all deserved this honor of "The Walk"
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 243882 on May 30, 2008 at 10:20 p.m.

in response to 448869

First of all...you misspelled "jeolous". So technically you are classified in the "bunch of idiots that can't spell".

Second of all, I would never be in "their shoes" because I communicate and am active with my children and if they had failed...I would have been proactive instead of procrastinating until the fifth try. If your daughter had tutoring and still failed, then maybe you need to talk to the counselor about possible learning disabilities.

Did you really think “money” would buy your way? You have my pity. So Sad.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 10:25 p.m.

Dalia is 38 I think. I think her dh is younger than her.

I saw the news video on this issue. She makes it so much worse by the way she carries herself. As someone mentioned earlier....she has no class at all. Totally on the opposite page of Marion Luna Brem.

I hope there was a prenup before she and Marion's son got married.

All of you wealthy families out there with sons within the age range as Karrah....you better warn your sons. There is a gold digger in the making coming up in this world. She may be married but how many of you want to bet that it won't last.?
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 702497 on May 30, 2008 at 10:32 p.m.

None of this would have happened had the daughter's mind been more on her studies than the boys. 18, pregnant, married....tsk tsk tsk....there is the answer as to why she failed this test.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 294963 on May 30, 2008 at 10:35 p.m.

in response to 242439

this has nothing to do with the dealership. i know people who work there and they should not be punished for something they have no control over...doing so would be just as dumb as what dalia brem is doing.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 699874 on May 30, 2008 at 11:26 p.m.

I had not laughed so hard in such a long time until I read the part where the posters outed the Mom for her poster ID. Way to go! I haven't seen any in a while from her, so guess she really was put in her place. That is just so priceless.

I do remember seeing the Closet Snoop article, and had a good laugh at the suggestion of an Eva Longoria resemblance.

p.s we love you, Sweetie. Keep on posting!
~the bunny~
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 238312 on May 30, 2008 at 11:46 p.m.

Booby Galvan is a hero! Thank you for standing up for what's right--rules are rules- and not going all politics on us.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 234878 on May 30, 2008 at 11:52 p.m.

I'm on the west coast so could you fill me in on something? Are they graduating her and barring her from just the ceremony or do you not graduate at all by failing the test?
I've looked into this test and perceive it as about what an average seventh grader should know.
I disagree that it's the parents responsibility to see that the child is properly educated. That responsibility lies with the school system and the student. It's the parents responsibility to see that the child does their homework, goes to bed on time and arrives at school the next day. Homework is a practice of what was learned in classroom and if the child doesn't know what they are doing when they bring it home, then the teacher is out of touch with the students. It's a teacher's responsibility to find out if the student is "getting it" or not. If a teacher stands up in the front rapping this stuff off and expects the student to ask for help, they don't understand a child's basic ego. You can expect a child to raise their hand and essentially say, "Hey everybody, I'm dumb and I can't think" when all that is needed is a simpler explanation of a procedure.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710237 on May 30, 2008 at 11:56 p.m.

in response to 702497

So, this young IS PREGNANT as someone earlier mentioned?

I, too, saw her on TV and was somewhat surprised that she looked pregnant...very pregnant. Her bump clearly showed through her full top. When a poster mentioned it, i thought someone was just being ugly. I didn't know it was the truth.

Wow...all of this and now being pregnant....imagine walking the stage being pregnant and the father out there somewhere. This is the mother from hell, alright.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 710237 on May 31, 2008 at 12:01 a.m.

in response to 702497

So, this young IS PREGNANT as someone earlier mentioned?

I, too, saw her on TV and was somewhat surprised that she looked pregnant...very pregnant. Her bump clearly showed through her full top. When a poster mentioned it, i thought someone was just being ugly. I didn't know it was the truth.

Wow...all of this and now being pregnant....imagine walking the stage being pregnant and the father out there somewhere. This is the mother from hell, alright.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 234878 on May 31, 2008 at 12:06 a.m.

Here is the test...

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.as...
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 242439 on May 31, 2008 at 12:24 a.m.

in response to 294963

That may be, but just by the simple fact that she's related to the Brem family, she's tarnishing their reputation and, by extension, her business. There may be some people who will not want to support a family business where their members behave like irrational animals in public. I know when I saw the Love Chrysler commercial at a friend's house and I saw this lady in it, it turned me off completely. Bet others would feel the same way.

On a side note, I never liked that dealership - they tried to rip us off one time on a minivan and we ended up having to sic our lawyer on them.

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, contain links to sites other than Caller.com, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned.
E.W. Scripps Co.
Scripps Newspaper Group — Online
© 2008 The E.W. Scripps Co.

How is it a policy (if)there was no malicious intent behind the policies, which had been in place for some time. Why?

2008-05-15T04:13:00.000-07:00

This Court has found an issue that needs to be addressed before we can determine whether or not to proceed with Applicant's.......housekeeping

2008-03-25T04:20:00.000-07:00

Wake up Corpus Christi Parents

2008-01-10T00:57:00.000-08:00

Seal
Office of the Attorney General
State of Texas

August 28, 1996

The Honorable Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston, Suite 634
Houston, Texas 77002-1891
Opinion No. DM-412

Re: Whether a county juvenile board is authorized to provide educational services to students who have not been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court and ordered to attend a juvenile justice alternative education program pursuant to Education Code, section 37.011(b), and related question (RQ-892)

Dear Mr. Driscoll:

Among the education reforms passed by the legislature last session in Senate Bill 1 (1) are several provisions requiring juvenile boards in certain counties to establish juvenile justice alternative education programs (JJAEPs), see Educ. Code §§ 37.011 - .013, (2) and to provide educational services to certain students who have been found by a juvenile court to have engaged in delinquent conduct, see id. § 37.011(b). On behalf of the Harris County Juvenile Board, you ask whether a juvenile board is authorized to provide educational services to students (3) who have not been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court and ordered to attend a JJAEP pursuant to Education Code, section 37.011(b). You also ask if a juvenile board is authorized to enter into a memorandum of understanding with school districts that provides for JJAEP placement of students expelled from school but not adjudicated delinquent pursuant to section 37.011(b). We believe that the legislature intended to authorize juvenile boards to provide educational services to students who are not required to attend a JJAEP by a juvenile court order and to authorize a juvenile board to enter into an agreement with school districts to provide such services.

During the last session, in revising the Education Code, the legislature made clear its intent that school districts must "maintain a safe and disciplined environment conducive to student learning." Id. § 4.001(b). Chapter 37 of the newly revised Education Code is intended to ensure school and community safety by requiring school districts to adopt student codes of conduct, imposing certain disciplinary standards in schools, and fostering a working relationship between school districts and the juvenile justice system, particularly juvenile courts and county juvenile boards. In addition to significantly revising the Education Code in Senate Bill 1, the legislature passed numerous measures affecting the juvenile justice system, (4) including chapter 59 of the Family Code, which sets forth a "progressive sanctions" framework for use in sentencing juvenile offenders. (5) Chapter 37 of the Education Code mirrors the "progressive sanctions" framework of chapter 59 of the Family Code, providing disciplinary measures which increase in severity with the seriousness of the offense and a parallel continuum of alternative placement settings - - alternative education programs (AEPs) administered by school districts for students who have committed less serious offenses and JJAEPs administered by juvenile boards for students who have committed more serious offenses.

Section 37.001 of the Education Code requires each school district, "and jointly, as appropriate," with the juvenile board of each county in which the school district is located, to adopt a student code of conduct that must:

(1) specify the circumstances, in accordance with this subchapter, under which a student may be removed from a classroom, campus, or alternative education program;

(2) outline the responsibilities of each juvenile board concerning the establishment and operation of a juvenile justice alternative education program under Section 37.011;

(3) define the conditions on payments from the district to each juvenile board;

(4) specify conditions that authorize or require a principal or other appropriate administrator to transfer a student to an alternative education program; and

(5) outline conditions under which a student may be suspended as provided by Section 37.005 or expelled as provided by Section 37.007.

Id. § 37.001(a)(1) - (5). Section 37.008 requires each school district to provide an AEP that:

(1) is provided in a setting other than a student's regular classroom;

(2) is located on or off of a regular school campus;

(3) provides for the students who are assigned to the alternative education program to be separated from students who are not assigned to the program;

(4) focuses on English language arts, mathematics, science, history, and self-discipline;

(5) provides for students' educational and behavioral needs; and

(6) provides supervision and counseling.

Id. § 37.008(a)(1) - (6). Section 37.011 requires a juvenile board in a county with a population greater than 125,000 to develop a JJAEP. A JJAEP "must focus on English language arts, mathematics, science, history, and self-discipline," id. § 37.011(d), and must operate at least seven hours a day, 180 days per year, id. § 37.011(f). (6) Section 37.012(a) requires the school district in which a student is enrolled on the date the student is ordered to attend the JJAEP to transfer to the juvenile board in charge of the JJAEP "funds equal to the district's average per student expenditure in [AEPs]" for the portion of the year the student will attend the JJAEP.

These alternative placement settings dovetail with the progressive sanctions set forth in chapter 37. School-administered AEPs serve students who have engaged in less serious misconduct, while juvenile board-administered JJAEPs serve students who have engaged in more serious misconduct. A student may be placed in an AEP in one of several ways. (7) First, a principal may place a student in an AEP if the student has been removed from a classroom by a teacher for repeatedly interfering with the teacher's ability to communicate with the other students in the class or repeatedly interfering with the other students' ability to learn. Id. § 37.002(b), (c). Under section 37.006, a school district must transfer to an AEP a student who (i) engages in conduct punishable as a felony (8) or (ii) commits certain offenses (9) on school property or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity. (10) In addition, a court may order a student who has been expelled pursuant to section 37.007, see discussion infra, to attend an AEP as a condition of probation if the school district and the juvenile board have entered into a memorandum of understanding "concerning the juvenile probation department's role in supervising and providing other support services for students in alternative education programs." Id. § 37.010(c).

A school district must expel a student from school if the student commits certain weapons offenses or other serious offenses, such as aggravated assault, sexual assault, arson, murder, indecency with a child, or aggravated kidnapping, on school property or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity on or off school property, id. § 37.007(a), or if the student engages in conduct which contains elements of these offenses against any school district employee in retaliation for or as a result of the employee's employment with the school district, id. § 37.007(c). (11) A school district may expel a student who has been placed in an AEP for disciplinary reasons and continues to engage in serious or persistent misbehavior that violates the district's student code of conduct, id. § 37.007(b), or a student who engages in conduct that contains the elements of the offense of criminal mischief if the conduct is punishable as a felony, id. § 37.007(f). (12) Expulsion appears to include expulsion from all school district campuses and programs, including an AEP. (13) See id. § 37.008(h). (14)

Although chapter 37 provides great detail regarding the circumstances under which a student must or may be transferred to an AEP or expelled, it says relatively little about placement in a JJAEP. Section 37.011(b) provides that if a student is found to have engaged in conduct for which a student may be expelled under section 37.007, see supra, and is found by a juvenile court to have engaged in delinquent conduct, (15) the juvenile court shall require the JJAEP in the county in which the conduct occurred to provide educational services to the student, id. § 37.011(b)(1), and order the student to attend the JJAEP, id. § 37.011(b)(2).

In essence, you ask whether a juvenile board is authorized to provide educational services to students other than pursuant to a juvenile court order under section 37.011(b)(1). You suggest that under section 37.011(b) a juvenile board may be limited to providing educational services to students pursuant to a juvenile court order, contending that because "the statute mentions no other class of students who should be placed in a JJAEP . . . [t]his express listing of those who must attend the JJAEP is the equivalent of the express exclusion of all others." We disagree. We construe section 37.011(b) to delineate the circumstances under which a juvenile court must order the JJAEP in the county in which the conduct occurred to provide educational services to the student and order the student to attend the JJAEP. (16) To construe section 37.011(b) to exclude the placement of students in a JJAEP in other situations would not be consistent with other provisions of chapter 37, particularly section 37.001, the student code of conduct provision. We believe that a juvenile board's authority to provide educational services to students under other circumstances must be implied from section 37.001. As we explain below, to conclude otherwise would render two requirements for a student code of conduct superfluous. We must construe chapter 37 to avoid this result. See Gov't Code § 311.021(2) (in enacting a statute, it is presumed that the entire statute is intended to be effective).

Section 37.001 requires each school district to adopt a student code of conduct jointly, as appropriate, with each juvenile board in the county. The student code of conduct must "outline the responsibilities of each juvenile board concerning the establishment and operation of a [JJAEP]," Educ. Code § 37.001(a)(2), and "define the conditions on payments from the district to each juvenile board," id. § 37.001(a)(3). If the legislature had intended to limit juvenile boards to providing educational services to students pursuant to a juvenile court order under section 37.011(b), a juvenile board's responsibility to establish and operate a JJAEP would be fully elaborated by sections 37.011 through 37.013. The legislature would not have required a school district to outline with juvenile boards "the responsibilities of each juvenile board concerning the establishment and operation of a [JJAEP]." Id. § 37.001(a)(2). Furthermore, as noted above, section 37.012(a) requires the school district in which a student is enrolled on the date the student is ordered to attend the JJAEP to transfer funds to provide for the student's education to the juvenile board in charge of the JJAEP. A school district is unconditionally obliged to transfer these funds to the juvenile board. Had the legislature intended to limit juvenile boards to providing educational services to students pursuant to a juvenile court order under section 37.011(b), it would have been unnecessary to require a school district to define with juvenile boards "the conditions on payments from the district to each juvenile board." Id. § 37.001(a)(3). (17)

In addition, as you point out in your brief, if one were to conclude that a juvenile board is limited to providing educational services to students found to have engaged in conduct justifying expulsion and found by a juvenile court to have engaged in delinquent conduct, then students who are expelled but who have not been adjudicated delinquent will have no access to a JJAEP and thus could possibly have no access to education and other services. (18) It is unlikely that the legislature intended to make education and other services available to expelled students who have been adjudicated delinquent but deny all access to education and other services to expelled students who have not been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court. It is also unlikely that the legislature intended to create obstacles to placing expelled students who have not been adjudicated delinquent in supervised, educational settings. Again, we must construe chapter 37 to avoid this result. See Gov't Code § 311.021(3) (in enacting a statute, it is presumed a just and reasonable result is intended).

Furthermore, the continuum of sanctions and alternative placement settings for behavior management in chapter 37 is designed to protect the safety of schools and communities, and to prevent students who misbehave from committing more serious offenses, by providing problem students with ongoing supervision, education, and other appropriate services. Construing chapter 37 to preclude juvenile boards from enrolling students who have been expelled but not adjudicated delinquent would break this continuum. Construing chapter 37 to permit juvenile boards to enroll these students, on the other hand, is consistent with the framework of progressive sanctions and alternative placement settings established by the legislature.

You also ask if a juvenile board is authorized to enter into a memorandum of understanding with school districts that provides for JJAEP placement of students expelled from school but not adjudicated delinquent pursuant to section 37.011(b). (19) Although section 37.001 not does expressly authorize a school district and a juvenile board to enter into a memorandum of understanding, we believe it impliedly authorizes a school district and a juvenile board to enter into a memorandum of understanding consistent with a jointly adopted student code of conduct in order to reduce obligations undertaken by the school district and juvenile board in the student code of conduct to a formal agreement and to separate those obligations from other matters which must be included in a student code of conduct. (20) For the reasons stated above, we believe that such a memorandum of understanding may provide for JJAEP placement of students expelled from school but not adjudicated delinquent pursuant to section 37.011(b). (21)
S U M M A R Y

A county juvenile board is authorized to provide educational services at a juvenile justice alternative education program to students other than pursuant to a juvenile court order under section 37.011(b)(1). A county juvenile board is authorized to enter into a memorandum of understanding with school districts that provides for JJAEP placement of students expelled from school but not adjudicated delinquent pursuant to section 37.011(b).

Yours very truly,
Morales signature

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

JORGE VEGA
First Assistant Attorney General

SARAH J. SHIRLEY
Chair, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Mary R. Crouter
Assistant Attorney General

Footnotes

[1] See Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 260, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2207.

[2] See id. § 1, at 2358-60.

[3] Your brief suggests that students would be placed in a JJAEP with parental consent. See note 21 infra. In addition, you appear to be interested in the juvenile board's authority only with respect to students who have been expelled from the school district.

[4] See, e.g., Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 671, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3643, 3643 (H.B. 466); Act of May 27, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 748, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3884, 3884 (H.B. 120); Act of May 27, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 262, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2517, 2517 (H.B. 327); Act of May 26, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 626, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3494, 3494 (H.B. 1687); Act of May 24, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 617, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3476, 3476 (H.B. 1375); Act of May 24, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 598, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3436, 3436 (H.B. 330); Act of May 24, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 512, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 3253, 3253 (H.B. 2035); Act of May 19, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 258, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2197, 2197 (S.B. 267).

[5] See Act of May 27, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 262, § 53, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2517, 2557.

[6] A juvenile board in a county with a population of 125,000 or less may develop a JJAEP. Educ. Code § 37.011(a). Such a JJAEP is not subject to the requirements of section 37.011, subsections (c), (d), (f), or (g). Id.

[7] A student who is placed in an AEP by a school district for a length of time to extend beyond the next grading period is entitled to certain procedures. Id. § 37.009(b), (c), (d).

[8] A federal district court has held that Education Code section 37.006(a), to the extent it mandates that a student who engages in felonious conduct off-campus and away from school-related activities be placed in an AEP, violates the United States Constitution because it fails to provide for any measure of due process. See Nevares v. San Marcos Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist., No. A-96-CA-093 JN (W.D. Tex. May 16, 1996). The court rejected the school district's contention that the plaintiff had neither a property interest nor a liberty interest in his placement in the regular high school classes as opposed to the AEP.

[9] The offenses include: assault under Penal Code section 22.01(a)(1) or terroristic threat under Penal Code section 22.07; certain drug and alcohol-related offenses; offenses relating to abusable glue or aerosol paint under Health and Safety Code sections 485.031 through 485.035 or volatile chemicals under Health and Safety Code chapter 484; or public lewdness under Penal Code section 21.07 or indecent exposure under Penal Code section 21.08. Educ. Code § 37.006(a)(1) - (5). In addition, a student who engages in the offense of retaliation, Penal Code § 36.06, against a school employee must be placed in an AEP. Educ. Code §§ 37.006(b), 37.007(c). If the conduct contains the elements of certain weapons offenses or other serious offenses, such as aggravated assault, sexual assault, arson, murder, indecency with a child, or aggravated kidnapping, the student must be expelled. Id. § 37.007(a).

[10] Under section 37.001(a)(4), a student code of conduct must "specify conditions that authorize or require a principal or other appropriate administrator to transfer a student to an alternative education program." We do not address whether a school district must incorporate these statutory conditions into the student code of conduct or is authorized to add to or modify these statutory conditions.

[11] If a student engages in the offense of retaliation, see Penal Code § 36.06, against a school employee and the conduct contains the elements of certain weapons offenses or other serious offenses, such as aggravated assault, sexual assault, arson, murder, indecency with a child, or aggravated kidnapping, the student must be expelled. Educ. Code § 37.007(c). In addition, federal law requires a school district to expel a student who brings a firearm to school. See id. § 37.007(d).

[12] See Penal Code § 28.03.

[13] Section 37.007(d)(2) provides, however, that a school district may provide educational services to a student who is expelled for bringing a firearm to school pursuant to federal law, see supra note 11, at an AEP.

[14] Before a student is expelled, the school district board of trustees or the board's designee must provide the student with a due process hearing. Educ. Code § 37.009(f).

We also note that under section 37.001(a)(5), a student code of conduct must "outline conditions under which a student may be . . . expelled as provided by Section 37.007." We do not address whether a school district must incorporate the statutory conditions for expulsion into the student code of conduct or whether a school district is authorized to add to or modify these statutory conditions.

[15] Family Code, section 51.03(a) defines the term "delinquent conduct" as follows:

Delinquent conduct is:

(1) conduct, other than a traffic offense, that violates a penal law of this state or of the United States punishable by imprisonment or by confinement in jail;

(2) conduct that violates a reasonable and lawful order of a juvenile court entered under Section 54.04 or 54.05 of this code, except an order prohibiting the following conduct:

(A) a violation of the penal laws of this state of the grade of misdemeanor that is punishable by fine only or a violation of the penal ordinances of any political subdivision of this state;

(B) the unexcused voluntary absence of a child from school; or

(C) the voluntary absence of a child from his home without the consent of his parent or guardian for a substantial length of time or without intent to return;

(3) conduct that violates a lawful order of a municipal court or justice court under circumstances that would constitute contempt of that court; or

(4) conduct that violates the laws of this state prohibiting driving while intoxicated or under the influence of intoxicating liquor (third or subsequent offense) or driving while under the influence of any narcotic drug or of any other drug to the degree that renders the child incapable of safely driving a vehicle (third or subsequent offense).

[16] We have not been asked and do not address whether a juvenile court has the discretion to order a child to attend a JJAEP under any other circumstances.

[17] You do not ask and we do not address whether a county juvenile board may expend county funds to provide educational services to expelled students.

[18] As noted above, a court may order a student who has been expelled pursuant to section 37.007 to attend a regular classroom, a regular campus, or an AEP as a condition of probation only if the school district and the juvenile board have entered into a memorandum of understanding "concerning the juvenile probation department's role in supervising and providing other support services for students in alternative education programs." Educ. Code § 37.010(c).

[19] You specifically ask about the following types of students:

(1) Students whose serious or persistent misbehavior warrants expulsion pursuant to section 37.007(b), who have not or could not be adjudicated as delinquent;

(2) Students, who are subject to mandatory expulsion for committing offenses listed in section 37.007(a), (c), (d), or (f), who have not yet been found to have engaged in delinquent conduct by a juvenile court;

(3) Students expelled for committing offenses listed in section 37.007(a), (c), (d), or (f) "but who were found by the juvenile court to have committed a lesser offense";

(4) Students expelled for committing offenses listed in section 37.007(a), (c), (d), or (f) "for whom no petition alleging delinquency is filed by the district attorney or for whom the petition has been withdrawn."

[20] Section 37.010(c) provides that a court may order a student who has been expelled pursuant to section 37.007 to attend a regular classroom, a regular campus, or an AEP as a condition of probation only if the school district and the juvenile board have entered into a memorandum of understanding "concerning the juvenile probation department's role in supervising and providing other support services for students in alternative education programs." Section 37.010(c) appears to refer to memoranda of understanding regarding AEPs as opposed to JJAEPs.

[21] Your brief suggests that students would be placed in a JJAEP with parental consent. Therefore, we do not address whether a school district is authorized to place a student in a JJAEP without parental consent. For this reason, we also do not address whether a school district must afford a student due process before placing the student in a JJAEP without parental consent or whether a student code of conduct that does not provide due process in such circumstances would violate the United States Constitution. Cf. Nevares, supra. Section 37.009(f) provides that a school district must provide a student a due process hearing before the student may be expelled under section 37.007. Neither section 37.009(f) nor any other provision of which we are aware details the procedures which might be applicable to a school district's decision to place a student who has been expelled in a JJAEP.

Texas OAG home page | Opinions & Open Government

general dwi law
general dwi law
driver's license suspension
driver's license suspension
minors using alcohol
minors using alcohol

state
state
federal
federal
juvenile
juvenile
dwi
dwi
on-line solicitation
on-line solicitation

2828 N. Harwood, Suite 1950
Dallas, TX. 75201
Dallas Ph: (214) 651-1121
Ft.Worth Ph: (817) 460-LAWS
Email: JudgeFinn@DavidFinn.com

dallas criminal lawyer
texas criminal defense attorney
dallas texas criminal attorney
dallas texas criminal attorney

Practice Areas

TEXAS JUVENILE LAW

In Texas, juveniles are defined as minors, older than 10 years of age and under the age of 17. Juveniles are treated differently than adult offenders and the general goal of the juvenile system is rehabilitation as opposed to punishment. However, the penalties in the juvenile system can still be severe. Some offenses, such as truancy and breaking curfew, are unique to juveniles, and would not be illegal if the accused were an adult. The juvenile justice system generally moves much more quickly than does the adult criminal justice system. Don't wait to hire a good juvenile defense lawyer to represent your child. Call Attorney David Finn at: 214-651-1121.

There are separate courts and rules that govern the juvenile process. The juvenile court system will generally make every effort to rehabilitate the child rather than simply incarcerate him. Only in extreme cases, such as serious felonies, usually involving allegations of violence or the use of a deadly weapon, will a juvenile be tried as an adult. The juvenile courts may hold a hearing to determine whether to transfer the juvenile to the adult court system. This is called a "transfer hearing." The court will base its decision to transfer on the following factors:

1. The seriousness of the offense
2. The child's criminal sophistication
3. Previous criminal record
4. Previous attempts to rehabilitate the juvenile offender
5. The court's belief that future attempts at rehabilitation will be unsuccessful

While many of the laws governing juveniles may differ from the adult system, the rights that juveniles enjoy are virtually identical to those enjoyed by adults.

1. A juvenile must be read his Miranda rights if placed under arrest.
2. A juvenile has the right to have an attorney present during interrogation.
3. A juvenile has the right to know the specific charges being brought by the State.
4. A juvenile has rights against self-incrimination.
5. A juvenile has the right to confront his accuser and examine witnesses.
6. A juvenile has the right to appeal the court's decision.
7. A juvenile does have the right to a jury trial during the adjudication phase

If a juvenile finds herself in a situation involving the police or other law enforcement, please remember the following information:

1. You do not have to submit to a search unless you have been placed under arrest.

If you are asked to give permission to search you should politely but firmly decline. If the police say they have a search warrant, ask to see it.

2. Do not resist arrest.
3. Do not volunteer information or answer questions without your attorney present.
4. Provide only your name, address, and phone number.
5. Call your parents as soon as possible.
6. Insist that your parents and an attorney be present during questioning.
7. Do not discuss your case with anyone other than your attorney.

Do not discuss your case with your friends or classmates.

Finally, do not attempt to represent yourself in court. Hire an experienced criminal defense attorney, preferably one who is board-certified in criminal law.

Texas Juvenile Justice: Overview

Taking Into Custody; Issuance of Warning Notice: Texas Family Code Section 52.01

A child may be taken into custody: pursuant to an order of the juvenile court; pursuant to the Texas laws for arrest; by a law enforcement officer if there is probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in conduct that violates the penal laws of Texas or any political subdivision or delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision. It is the duty of the law enforcement officer who has taken a child into custody to transport the child to the appropriate detention facility if the child is not released to the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child. If the juvenile detention facility is located outside the county in which the child is taken into custody, it shall be the duty of the law enforcement officer who has taken the child into custody or, if authorized by the commissioners court of the county, the sheriff of that county, to transport the child to the appropriate juvenile detention facility unless the child is released to the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child.

Delinquent Conduct: Conduct Indicating a Need for Supervision:

Texas Family Code Section 51.03

(a) Delinquent conduct is defined as:

1. conduct, other than a traffic offense, that violates a penal law of Texas or of the United States punishable by imprisonment or by confinement in jail;
2. conduct that violates a lawful order of a municipal court or justice court under circumstances that would constitute contempt of that court;
3. conduct that constitutes: Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), Flying While Intoxicated, Boating While Intoxicated, Intoxication Assault, Intoxication Manslaughter, and Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol by a minor (DUI).

(b) Conduct indicating a need for supervision includes:

1. conduct, other than a traffic offense, that violates the penal laws of Texas of the grade of misdemeanor that are punishable by a fine only (class c-misdemeanors); the penal ordinances of any political subdivision of Texas; the absence of a child on 10 or more days or parts of days within a 6 month period in the same school year or on 3 or more days or parts of days within a 4 week period from school; the voluntary absence of a child from the child's home without the consent of the child's parents or guardian for a substantial length of time or without intent to return; conduct prohibited by city ordinance or by state law involving the inhalation of the fumes or vapors of paint; or an act that violates a school district's previously communicated written standards of student conduct for which the child has been expelled under Section 37.007(c), Texas Education Code.

Release from Detention: Texas Family Code Section 53.02

(a) If a child is brought before the court or delivered to a detention facility, the intake or other authorized officer of the court shall immediately make an investigation and shall release the child unless it appears that his detention is warranted under subsection (b), below.

The release may be conditioned upon requirements reasonably necessary to insure the child's appearance at later proceedings, but the conditions of the release must be in writing and filed with the office or official designated by the court and a copy furnished to the child.

(b) A child taken into custody may be detained prior to hearing on the petition only if:

1. the child is likely to abscond or be removed from the court's jurisdiction;
2. suitable supervision, care, or protection for the child is not being provided by a parent, guardian, custodian, or other person;
3. the child has no parent, guardian, custodian, or other person able to return the child to the court when required;
4. the child may be dangerous to himself or herself or the child may threaten the safety of the public if released;
5. the child has previously been found to be a delinquent child or has previously been convicted of a penal offense punishable by a term in jail or prison and is likely to commit an offense if released; or
6. the child's detention is required under subsection (f), below.

(c) If the child is not released, a request for detention hearing shall be made and promptly presented to the court, and an informal detention hearing shall be held promptly, but not later than the second working day after the child is taken into custody. If the child is taken into custody on a Friday or Saturday, then the detention hearing shall be held on the first working day after the child is taken into custody.

(d) A release of a child to an adult must be conditioned on the agreement of the adult to be subject to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and to an order of contempt by the court if the adult, after notification, is unable to produce the child at later proceedings.

(e) If a child being released under this section is expelled from school in a county with a population greater than 125,000, the release shall be conditioned on the child's attending a juvenile justice alternative education program pending a deferred prosecution or formal court disposition of the child's case.

(f) A child who is alleged to have engaged in delinquent conduct and to have used, possessed, or exhibited a firearm in the commission of the offense shall be detained until the child is released at the direction of the judge of the juvenile court, a substitute judge, or a referee appointed, including an oral direction by telephone, or until a detention hearing is held.

Detention Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.01

(a) Generally speaking, a detention hearing without a jury shall be held promptly, but not later than the second working day after the child is taken into custody; provided, however, that when a child is detained on a Friday or Saturday, then such detention hearing shall be held on the first working day after the child is taken into custody.

(b) Reasonable notice of the detention hearing, either oral or written, shall be given, stating the time, place, and purpose of the hearing. Notice shall be given to the child and, if they can be found, to his parents, guardian, or custodian. Prior to the beginning of the hearing, the court shall inform the parties of the child's right to counsel and to appointed counsel if they are indigent and of the child's right to remain silent with respect to any allegations of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.

(c) At the detention hearing, the court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or by professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. Prior to the detention hearing, the court shall provide the attorney for the child with access to all written matter to be considered by the court in making the detention decision. The court may order counsel not to reveal items to the child or his parents if such disclosure would materially harm the treatment and rehabilitation of the child or would substantially decrease the likelihood of receiving information from the same or similar sources in the future.

(d) A detention hearing may be held without the presence of the child's parents if the court has been unable to locate them. If no parent or guardian is present, the court shall appoint counsel or a guardian ad litem for the child.

(e) At the conclusion of the hearing the court shall order the child released from detention unless it appears that he is likely to abscond, suitable supervision is not being provided to the child, he has no parent or guardian able to return the child to court when required, he may be dangerous to himself or others, or he has previously been found to be a delinquent child or has been previously convicted of a penal offense higher than a Class C misdemeanor and is likely to commit an offense if released. If the judge concludes that the child should be detained, the detention order extends for no more than 10 working days. Further detention orders may be made following subsequent detention hearings. The initial detention hearing may not be waived, but subsequent detention hearing may be waived.

Note: No statement made by the child at the detention hearing shall be admissible against the child at any other hearing.

Preliminary Investigation & Determinations; Notice to Parents:

Texas Family Code Section 53.01

On referral of a child, the intake officer, probation officer, or other person authorized by the court shall conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether the person referred is a child and whether there is probable cause to believe that the child engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision. If it is determined that the person is not a child or there is no probable cause, the person shall immediately be released. The child's parents are to promptly receive notice of the whereabouts of the child and also a statement explaining why the child was taken into custody. If the child is alleged to have engaged in delinquent conduct of the grade of felony, or conduct constituting a misdemeanor offense involving violence to a person or the use or possession of a firearm, illegal knife, or club, then the case is immediately forwarded to the office of the prosecuting attorney.

Summons: Texas Family Code Section 53.06

The juvenile court shall direct issuance of a summons to the child named in the petition, the child's parents, guardian, or custodian, the child's guardian ad litem, and any other person who appears to the court to be a proper or necessary party to the proceeding. A party, other than the child, may waive service of summons by written stipulation or by voluntary appearance at the hearing.

Service of Summons: Texas Family Code Section 53.07

If a person to be served with a summons is in Texas and can be found, the summons shall be served upon him personally at least 2 days before the adjudication hearing. If he is in Texas but cannot be found, but his address is known or can be ascertained, the summons may be served on him by mailing a copy by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, at least 5 days before the day of the hearing. If he is outside Texas but can be found or his address is known, service of the summons may be made either by delivering a copy to him personally or mailing a copy to him by registered mail, return receipt requested, at least 5 days before the day of the adjudication hearing.

Attendance at Hearing: Parent or Other Guardian: Texas Family Code Section 51.115

Parents or guardians of a child are required by law to attend each court hearing affecting a child held under: possible transfer to criminal district/adult court; adjudication hearing; disposition hearing; hearing to modify disposition; release or transfer hearing. If a parent or guardian receives notice of any of these proceedings and is a resident of Texas, failure to appear could result in a fine for contempt of court.

Photographs & Fingerprints of Children: Texas Family Code Sections 58.002-0021

With limited exceptions, a child may not be photographed or fingerprinted without the consent of the juvenile court unless the child is taken into custody or referred to the juvenile court for conduct that constitutes a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail (which means a Class A or Class B misdemeanor). However, this prohibition does not prohibit law enforcement from photographing or fingerprinting a child who is not in custody if the child's parent or guardian voluntarily consents in writing. Furthermore, this prohibition does not apply to fingerprints that are required or authorized to be submitted or obtained for an application for a driver's license or personal identification card.

Note/Exception to General Rule stated above: Law enforcement may take temporary custody of a child to take the child's fingerprints if the officer: has probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in delinquent conduct; the officer has investigated that conduct and found other fingerprints during the investigation; and the officer has probable cause to believe that the child's fingerprints will match the other fingerprints. Law enforcement may take temporary custody of a child to take the child's photograph if the officer: has probable cause to believe that the child has engaged in delinquent conduct; and the officer has probable cause to believe that the child's photograph will be of material assistance in the investigation of the conduct. However, in either instance, unless the child then placed under arrest, the child must be released from temporary custody as soon as the fingerprints or photographs are obtained.

Waiver of Rights: Texas Family Code Section 51.09

Unless a contrary intent clearly appears elsewhere in the Family Code, any right granted to a child by this Section or by the constitution or laws of Texas or the United States may be waived in proceedings under this section if:

1. the waiver is made by the child and the attorney for the child;
2. the child and the attorney waiving the right are informed of and understand the right and the possible consequences of waiving it;
3. the waiver is voluntary; and
4. the waiver is made in writing or in court proceedings that are recorded.

Polygraph Examination: Texas Family Code Section 51.151

If a child is taken into custody pursuant to an order of the juvenile court or pursuant to the laws of arrest by a law enforcement officer, a person may not administer a polygraph examination to the child without the consent of the child's attorney or the juvenile court unless the child is transferred to a criminal district court for prosecution in the adult system. Bottom line: Do not consent to a polygraph examination without consulting with your lawyer.

Physical or Mental Examination: Texas Family Code Section 51.20

(a) At any stage of the proceedings the juvenile court may order a child who is referred to the juvenile court or who is alleged by a petition or found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision to be examined by the local mental health or mental retardation authority or another appropriate expert, including a physician, psychiatrist, or psychologist.

(b) If, after conducting an examination of a child and reviewing any other relevant information, there is reason to believe that the child has a mental illness or mental retardation, the probation department shall refer the child to the local mental health or mental retardation authority for evaluation and services, unless the prosecutor has filed a court petition against the child alleging delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision.

Election Between Juvenile Court & Alternate Juvenile Court:

Texas Family Code Section 51.18

(a) This section applies only to a child who has a right to a trial before a juvenile court the judge of which is not an attorney licensed to practice in Texas.

(b) On any matter that may lead to an order appealable under Section 56.01 of the Family Code, a child may be tried before either the juvenile court or the alternate juvenile court.

(c) The child may elect to be tried before the alternate juvenile court only if the child files a written notice with that court not later than 10 days before the date of the trial. After the notice is filed, the child may be tried only in the alternate juvenile court. If the child does not file a notice as provided by this section, the child may be tried only in the juvenile court.

(d) If the child is tried before the juvenile court, the child is not entitled to a trial de novo before the alternate juvenile court.

Transfer/Waiver: Texas Family Code Section 54.02

The juvenile court may waive its exclusive original jurisdiction and transfer a child to the appropriate criminal district court to be tried as an adult if the child is alleged to have violated a penal law of the grade of felony if the child was 14 years of age or older at the time he is alleged to have committed the offense, if the offense is a capital felony, an aggravated controlled substance felony, or a felony of the first degree; or 15 years of age or older at the time the child is alleged to have committed the offense, if the offense is a felony of the second or third degree or a state jail felony.

The juvenile court judge is not required to certify a child to stand trial as an adult. It's a judgment call. The juvenile court judge will investigate the matter and hold a hearing on the transfer request. The judge orders a complete diagnostic study, social evaluation, and a full investigation of the child, his circumstances, and the circumstances of the alleged offense. At the transfer hearing the court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. In making her decision whether to transfer the case to the adult court, the judge considers: (1) whether the alleged offense was against person or property, with greater weight in favor of transfer given to offenses against a person; (2) the sophistication and maturity of the child; (3) the record and previous history of the child; and (4) the prospects of adequate protection of the public and the likelihood of the rehabilitation of the child by use or procedures, services, and facilities currently available to the juvenile court.

Determinate Sentencing: Texas Family Code Section 53.045

If a child is accused of a very serious criminal violation, or habitual felony conduct (see section below), the prosecutor can pursue what is called determinate sentencing. In order to pursue determinate sentencing the prosecutor files a petition with the grand jury, basically asking the grand jury to grant the prosecutor's request to pursue determinate sentencing if the child is convicted. If 9 members of the grand jury approve the petition, then determinate sentencing becomes a viable sentencing option for the judge/jury if the child is convicted of the offense. Determinate sentencing doesn't mean that the child will be tried as an adult in a criminal district court. The case remains in the juvenile court even if the grand jury grants the request for determinate sentencing. but the stakes for the child are raised dramatically if the grand jury grants the prosecutor's petition for determinate sentencing.

Eligibility: The prosecutor can pursue determinate sentencing if the child is charged with habitual felony conduct, or if the child is charged with any of the following offenses:

capital murder, murder, manslaughter, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, injury to a child, elderly, or disabled individual if punishable as a felony other than a state jail felony, felony deadly conduct involving the discharge of a firearm, aggravated controlled substance felony, criminal solicitation of a minor, indecency with a child, arson, if bodily injury or death is suffered by any person by reason of the commission of the arson, intoxication manslaughter, or attempted murder or attempted capital murder. If your child is charged with one of the offenses listed above, she is eligible for determinate sentencing even if this is her first offense.

Impact: If the grand jury grants the prosecutor's request to impose determinate sentencing, and the child is convicted of habitual felony conduct or any of the offenses listed above, then the court or jury may sentence the child to commitment in the Texas Youth Commission with a possible transfer to the institutional division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (adult prison system) for a term of: up to 40 years if the conduct constitutes a capital felony, first-degree felony, or an aggravated controlled substance felony; up to 20 years if the conduct constitutes a second-degree felony; and up to 10 years if the conduct constitutes a third-degree felony. So instead of being sent to the Texas Youth Commission until the child turns 18, determinate sentencing would allow the child to be sentenced to up to 40 years in the adult prison system by a judge or jury.

Habitual Felony Conduct: Texas Family Code Section 51.031

(a) Habitual felony conduct is conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony, other than a state jail felony, if:

1. the child who engaged in the conduct has at least 2 previous final adjudications as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a penal law of the grade of felony; and,
2. the second previous final adjudication is for conduct that occurred after the date the first previous adjudication became final; and,
3. all appeals relating to the previous adjudications have been exhausted.

Review by Prosecutor: Texas Family Code Section 53.012

The prosecuting attorney shall promptly review the circumstances and allegations of a referral made to her for legal sufficiency and the desirability of prosecution and may file a petition without regard to whether probable cause was found during the court's preliminary investigation.

If the prosecutor does not file a petition requesting the adjudication of the child referred to the prosecutor, the prosecutor must terminate all proceedings, if the reason is for the lack of probable cause; or return the referral to the juvenile probation department for further proceedings.

The prosecutors have considerable discretion and control over your child's case.

Deferred Prosecution: Texas Family Code Section 53.03

(a) Subject to subsections (e) and (g) below, if the preliminary investigation results in a determination that further proceedings in the case are authorized, the probation officer or other designated officer of the court, subject to the direction of the juvenile court, may advise the parties for a reasonable period of time not to exceed 6 months concerning deferred prosecution and rehabilitation of a child if:

1. deferred prosecution would be in the best interest of the public and child;
2. the child and her parent, guardian, or custodian consent with knowledge that consent is not obligatory; and
3. the child and his parent, guardian, or custodian are informed that they may terminate the deferred prosecution at any point and petition the court for a court hearing in the case.

(b) Except as otherwise permitted, the child may not be detained during or as a result of the deferred prosecution process.

(c) An incriminating statement made by a participant to the person giving advice and in the discussion or conferences incident thereto may not be used against the declarant in any court hearing.

(d) The court may adopt a fee schedule for deferred prosecution services. The maximum fee is $15 per month.

(e) The prosecuting attorney may defer prosecution for any child. A probation officer or other designated officer of the court may defer prosecution for a child who has previously been adjudicated for conduct that constitutes a felony only if the prosecuting attorney consents in writing.

(f) The probation officer or other officer supervising a program of deferred prosecution for a child shall report to the juvenile court any violation by the child of the program.

(g) Prosecution may not be deferred for a child alleged to have engaged in conduct that constitutes: driving/flying/boating while intoxicated, intoxication assault, intoxication manslaughter, or that constitutes a third or subsequent offense of consumption of alcohol by a minor or driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) of a minor.

First Offender Program: Texas Family Code Section 52.031

A juvenile board may establish a first offender program for the referral and disposition of children taken into custody for: (1) conduct indicating a need for supervision; or (2) delinquent conduct other than conduct that constitutes a felony of the first, second, or third degree, an aggravated controlled substance felony, or a capital felony; or a state jail felony or misdemeanor involving violence to a person or the use or possession of a firearm, illegal knife, or club, or a prohibited weapon, as described by Section 46.05, Texas Penal Code. If the child has previously been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct he may be ineligible for the First Offender Program. Also, the child's parents or guardian must receive notice that the child has been referred for disposition under the First Offender Program.

Teen Court Program: Texas Family Code Section 54.032

A juvenile court may defer adjudication proceedings during an adjudication hearing for not more than 180 days if the child:

(1) is alleged to have engaged in conduct indicating a need for supervision that violated a penal law of Texas of the grade of misdemeanor that is punishable by a fine only or a penal ordinance of a political subdivision of Texas;

(2) waives the privilege against self-incrimination and testifies under oath that the allegations are true;

(3) presents to the court an oral or written request to attend a teen court program; and

(4) has not successfully completed a teen court program for the violation of the same penal law or ordinance in the two years preceding the date that the alleged conduct occurred.

Note: The teen court program must be approved by the court.

Adjudication Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.03

This is what is commonly referred to as the "guilty-not guilty" phase of a trial. A child may be found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision only after an adjudication hearing. The child is presumed innocent unless and until the prosecution proves that the child is guilty of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof is on the state. The verdict must be unanimous.

At the beginning of an adjudication hearing the juvenile court judge shall explain to the child and his parent, guardian, or guardian ad litem: the allegations made against the child; the nature and possible consequences of the proceedings; the child's privilege against self-incrimination; the child's right to trial and to confront witnesses; the child's right to representation by an attorney if he is not already represented; and the child's right to a trial by jury.

Only material, relevant, and competent evidence in accordance with the Texas Rules of Criminal Evidence may be considered in an adjudication hearing. Hearsay testimony is generally not admissible. A statement made by the child out of court is insufficient to support a finding of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision unless it is corroborated in whole or in part by other evidence. An adjudication of delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision cannot be had upon testimony of an accomplice unless corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the child with the alleged delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the alleged conduct. Finally, evidence illegally seized or obtained is inadmissible in an adjudication hearing.

A child may be found guilty of committing a lesser-included offense of the offense charged.

If the judge or jury finds that the child did engage in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision, then the court or jury shall state which of the allegations in the petition were found to be established by the evidence. The court will then set a date and time for the disposition hearing.

If the judge or jury finds that the child did not engage in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision, the court shall dismiss the case with prejudice.

Disposition Hearing: Texas Family Code Section 54.04

This term can be confusing. What we're talking about here is the "sentencing" phase of the proceedings. The disposition hearing only comes into play if the child has been found guilty of the delinquent conduct or criminal activity alleged in the petition. If the child is found not guilty of all allegations during the adjudication hearing then there is no disposition hearing.

The disposition hearing is separate, distinct, and subsequent to the adjudication hearing. There is no right to a jury at the disposition hearing unless the child is in jeopardy of a determinate sentence as approved by the grand jury. If the child is eligible for determinate sentencing, then the child is entitled to a jury of 12 persons to determine the sentence.

At the disposition hearing, the juvenile court may consider written reports from probation officers, professional court employees, or professional consultants in addition to the testimony of witnesses. Prior to the disposition hearing, the child's lawyer is to have received all written matter to be considered in disposition. No disposition may be made unless the child is in need of rehabilitation or the protection of the public or the child requires that disposition be made. No disposition placing the child on probation outside the child's home may be made under this section unless the court or jury finds that the child, in the child's home, cannot be provided the quality of care and level of support and supervision that the child needs to meet the conditions of probation. If the judge or jury grant probation, the court will attach various conditions of the probation. Depending on the nature of the charges and the child's criminal history, if probation is not granted, the child could be sentenced to a term of confinement in the Texas Youth Commission.

Payment of Probation Fees: Texas Family Code Section 54.061

If a child is placed on probation, the juvenile court, after giving the child, parent, or other person responsible for the child's support, a reasonable opportunity to be heard, shall order the child, parent, or other person, if financially able to do so, to pay to the court a fee of not more than $15 a month during the period that the child continues on probation. If the court finds that a child, parent, or other person responsible for the child's support is financially unable to pay the probation fee, the court shall enter into the records of the child's case a statement of that finding.

Monitoring School Attendance: Texas Family Code Section 54.043

If the court places a child on probation and requires as a condition of probation that the child attend school, the probation officer shall monitor the child's school attendance and report to the court if the child is voluntarily absent from school.

Restitution: Texas Family Code Section 54.048

A juvenile court, in a disposition hearing, may order restitution to be made by the child and the child's parents. This applies regardless of whether the petition in the case contains a plea for restitution.

Admission of Unadjudicated Conduct: Section 54.045

During a disposition hearing, a child may admit having engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision for which the child has not been adjudicated and request the court to take the admitted conduct into account in the disposition of the child's pending case. If the prosecutor agrees in writing, then the court may take the admitted conduct into account in the disposition of the child. However, a court may take into account admitted conduct over with exclusive venue lies in another county only if the court obtains the written permission of the prosecuting attorney for that county. A child may not be adjudicated by any court for having engaged in conduct taken into account under this section unless the conduct taken into account included conduct that took place in another county and the written permission of the prosecuting attorney of that county was not obtained.

Community Service: Texas Family Code Section 54.044

If the court places a child on probation, the court shall require as a condition of probation that the child work a specified number of hours at a community service project approved by the court and designated by the juvenile probation department. This requirement may be waived if the court finds that the child is physically or mentally incapable of participating in the project or that participating in the project will be a hardship on the child or his family or that the child has shown good cause that community service should not be required.

Note: The court may also order that the child's parent perform community service with the child.

Child Placed on Probation for Conduct Involving a Handgun:

Texas Family Code Section 54.0406

(a) If a court or jury places a child on probation for conduct that violates a penal law that includes as an element of the offense the possession, carrying, using, or exhibiting of a handgun, and if at the adjudication hearing the court or the jury affirmatively finds that the child personally possessed, carried, used, or exhibited a handgun, the court must require as a condition of probation that the child, not later than the 30th day after the date the court places the child on probation, notify the juvenile probation officer who is supervising the child of the manner in which the child acquired the handgun, including the date and place of any person involved in the acquisition. The juvenile probation officer is then to relay any relevant information regarding the handgun to the police. Your lawyer should be with you when this takes place.

Note: Information provided by the child to the juvenile probation officer regarding the acquisition of the handgun and any other information derived from that information may not be used as evidence against the child in any juvenile or criminal proceeding.

Rights of Appeal: Warning: Texas Family Code Section 54.034

Before the court may accept a child's plea or stipulation of evidence in a proceeding under this title, the court must inform the child that if the court accepts the plea or stipulation and the court makes a disposition in accordance with the agreement between the state and the child regarding the disposition of the case, the child may not appeal an order of the court pursuant to an adjudication hearing, a disposition hearing, or a hearing to modify disposition, unless the court gives the child permission to appeal; or the appeal is based on a matter raised by written motion filed before the proceeding in which the child entered the plea or agreed to the stipulation of evidence. An appeal from an order of a juvenile court is to the court of appeals and the case may be carried to the Texas Supreme Court by writ of error or upon certificate, as in civil cases generally. The requirements governing a juvenile appeal are as in civil cases generally.

Note: An appeal does not suspend the order of the juvenile court, nor does it release the child from the custody of that court or of the person, institution, or agency to whose care the child is committed, unless the juvenile court so orders. However, the appellate court may provide for a personal bond pending the appeal.

Sealing Juvenile Records: Texas Family Code Section 58.003

One of the most important things that can be done for a juvenile is to get the juvenile records sealed as soon as allowed by law.

The benefits of sealing a child's juvenile records are immense. Once the records are sealed, information relating to the arrest, detention, prosecution, and conviction, are physically sealed and/or destroyed. This means that the child can start adulthood with a "clean" slate. And it also means that the child is authorized by law to say that he has never been convicted.

Section 58.003 of the Texas Family Code provides that, except for juveniles who received a determinate sentence for engaging in delinquent conduct that violated a penal law such as murder, capital murder, manslaughter, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated assault, injury to a child/elderly/disabled person, arson, indecency with a child, etc., or engaged in habitual felony conduct, the juvenile records may be sealed if the court finds that 2 years have elapsed since final discharge of the person or since the last official action in the person's case if there was no adjudication; and if since that time the person has not been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude or found to have engaged in delinquent conduct or conduct indicating a need for supervision and no proceeding is pending seeking conviction or adjudication.

A court may also order the sealing of records concerning a juvenile adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct that violated a penal law of the grade of felony (not including many determinate sentences) if: the person is 21 years of age or older; the person was not transferred by a juvenile court to an adult criminal court for prosecution; the records have not been used as evidence in the punishment phase of a criminal proceeding under Article 37.07, Code of Texas Criminal Procedure; and if the person has not been convicted of a penal law of the grade of felony after becoming age 17.

If a child is referred to the juvenile court for conduct constituting any offense and at the adjudication hearing (guilt/innocence) the child is found to be not guilty of each offense alleged, the court shall immediately order the sealing of all files and records relating to the case.

David Finn is board certified in criminal law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Call today for a free initial consultation.

The information contained in this web site is intended to convey general information about David Finn, PC. It should not be construed as legal advice or opinion. It is not an offer to represent you, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Any email sent via the Internet to David Finn, PC using email addresses listed in this web site would not be confidential and would not create an attorney-client relationship.

HOME :: ATTORNEY PROFILE :: IN THE NEWS :: FAQS :: PRACTICE AREAS :: RECENT RESULTS
RIGHT TO COUNSEL :: CONFIDENTIAL :: INTERVIEW :: BOARD CERTIFIED :: EXPUNCTIONS
ORDERS OF NONDISCLOSURE :: FRAUD/SEC CASES :: LIBRARY OF MOTIONS
OFFICE LOCATION :: CONTACT ME :: MY BLOG :: SITE MAP

copyright © 2003 david finn, p.c. all rights reserved.

http://www.dallascriminallawyer.com/practiceareas_juvenile.html

Requests for Public Information~ with holding information from a parent..........

2007-12-14T01:38:00.000-08:00

Judicial process........you have heard of it ......right?

2007-11-22T00:12:00.001-08:00

N THE 291st CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS

v.

DAMONS LOUISE

CRIMINAL NUMBER: F0283772
F0202033

DEFENDANT LEWIS’S MOTION AND INCORPORATED
MEMORANDUM FOR PRODUCTION AND INSPECTION OF BRADY MATERIAL AND/OR INFORMATION WHICH MAY LEAD TO EVIDENCE

Defendant DAMONS LOUISE (“Defendant ”) hereby moves this Court, pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and its progeny, to order the government to inquire about and make the following disclosures.

A. SPECIFIC BRADY REQUESTS

The Defendant respectfully requests that the Court order the government to inquire about and to disclose all materials, information, photographs, videos, recordings, records, notes, reports, electronic mail, communication and statements (herein referred to as “information”) known to the Government/State or which may become known, or which through due diligence may be learned from the investigating officers or the witnesses or persons having knowledge of this case, which is exculpatory in nature or favorable to Defendant or may lead to exculpatory or favorable material regarding either guilt or punishment. This includes, but is not limited to the following:

1. Information tending to indicate that Defendant is not guilty of the offenses alleged in the Indictments.

2. Information showing Defendant’s reputation for honesty, integrity, and/or trustworthiness.

3. Information showing the reputation for honesty, integrity, and/or trustworthiness, and/or any criminal record of any witness called by the State, including any complaining witness.

4. Names of any individuals who made an arguably favorable statement about the Defendant, or who indicated to law enforcement that Defendant is not guilty of the crimes alleged in the Indictments, or that the Defendant might not have had the intent to deprive the owner of property or funds or that any appropriation of property or funds was done with the owner’s effective consent or that the value of the property or funds alleged to have been stolen or illegally converted is less then the amounts alleged in the Indictments.

5. Information which arguably could be helpful or useful to the defense in detracting from the probative force of the government’s evidence, including impeachment evidence, or which arguably could lead to such information, including information that the Defendant might not have had the intent to deprive the owner of property or funds or that any appropriation of property or funds was done with the owner’s effective consent or that the value of the property or funds alleged to have been stolen or illegally converted is less then the amounts alleged in the Indictments. This request includes, but is not limited to, the following information, regarding any potential witness, informant or any government agent who has been involved in the investigation of this case:

(a) requests or statements by government agents or employees to any individual or corporation regarding the payment of defendants’ legal fees or expenses;

(b) prior convictions, arrests, misconduct, wrongs or bad acts;

(c) prior or subsequent inconsistent statements;

(d) instructions not to discuss the case with defense counsel;

(e) the mental, emotional, and physical history of Defendant, or any witness,

(f) the use of any lie detector or polygraph tests on any witness and the results;

(g) the use of narcotics or other controlled substances or alcohol;

(h) defect or deficiency of character for truthfulness, including but not limited to the complainant and officers involved in the investigation/arrest of Defendant;

(i) partiality, prejudice, bias, motive, interest or corruption;

(j) any defect or deficiency of capacity in any prospective witness to observe, remember or recount events;

(k) the existence and identification of each occasion on which each witness who was or is an informer, accomplice, or expert, has testified before any court, grand jury, or other tribunal or body;

(l) any benefit to individuals whatsoever in exchange for their cooperation, assistance or testimony, and any incentives paid, promised or discussed with the witness and the witness’s prior history of cooperation with law enforcement;

(m) a threat to prosecute if cooperation was not forthcoming;

(n)a promise or suggestion of leniency, compensation, assurance not to prosecute, or representations with respect to any uncharged misconduct;

(o) the immigration status of any potential government witness or informant who is not a United States citizen;

(p) any probation, parole, deferred adjudication, or deferred government or custodial status;

(q) any pending or potential criminal, civil or administrative investigations, legal disputes or transactions over which the government has real, apparent or perceived influence which could be brought against the witness or friends or relatives of the witness;

B. ARGUMENT

1. Disclosure of Materials.

The settled principles in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976), and Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995), instruct that the government may not suppress evidence favorable to a defendant either as direct or impeaching evidence. All documents and information which are exculpatory must be provided to the defense.

Courts have noted that the test is not whether the government attorneys believe the material to be favorable to the defense. Rather, it is whether the material “could fairly be construed as favorable to the defendant and material to the issue of guilt or punishment. . . .” United States v. Partin, 320 F. Supp. 285 ( E.D. La. 1970). Doubts as to whether certain items of evidence or types of information could be construed in the defense’s favor should be resolved in favor of their production to the defense. United States v. Perkins, 383 F. Supp. 922, 930 (N.D. Ohio 1974). Since material containing leads to possible exculpatory evidence must also be produced under Brady, the evidence itself need not be admissible at trial.

All information relating to the credibility of a witness clearly must be provided to the Defendant. United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985). Under Rule 608(b) of the Fed. R. Evid., the court has discretion to permit a defendant to cross-examine a witness as to specific instances of misconduct -- so called bad acts. The purpose of such testimony is specifically to attack the witness’ character; therefore, the government should be ordered to disclose to the defense any behavior of government witnesses that might arguably constitute such bad acts.

Similarly, the government has an obligation to disclose any and all consideration which is held out to a witness, or which the witness objectively hopes for or anticipates, because such consideration directly gives rise to an inference of interest. United States v. Mayer, 556 F.2d 245 (5 th Cir. 1977). A defendant is also entitled to be advised of any matter which might cause a witness to color his testimony in favor of the government out of fear or interest in self-preservation. Thus, the government must disclose both the stick and the carrot. United States v. Sutton, 542 F.2d 1239 (4 th Cir. 1976). If the government possesses any information which might reveal that anyone became a witness in this case because of any pressure applied to him by any other federal law enforcement or regulatory body, the government should be required to disclose this information.

The evidence of any such representations, which have been made by the government or which the government will make at any future time, is discoverable pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution; and the withholding of any such evidence constitutes a denial to a defendant herein of his constitutionally protected rights to due process and fundamental fairness in the criminal proceedings brought against him. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972); Brady, 373 U.S. at 85. Such evidence is not only exculpatory in the sense that it is legitimate grounds for impeachment of any witnesses the government may call to testify against the defendant, Williams v. Dutton 400 F.2d 797 (5 th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 343 U.S. 1105 (1969), but also is discoverable by a defendant in order to show such witnesses’ bias or prejudice in testifying at trial. Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (1974).

2. Prompt Disclosure.

Moreover, the production of the requested material should be required promptly and not postponed for the following reasons:

If it is to be any use to him at all, common sense dictates that evidence in the Government’s possession favorable to the defendant should be made available to him far enough in advance of trial to allow him sufficient time for its evaluation, preparation, and presentation at trial. Otherwise, the trial might well have to be interrupted for an inordinate length of time until the defendant has had an opportunity to explore all the ramifications of the Government’s disclosure, track down distant witnesses, examine documents or the like. Such probable delay could sensibly be avoided by pre-trial disclosure in those cases where disclosure is called for.

United States v. Partin , 320 F. Supp. 275 ( E.D. La. 1970).

3. Request for Thorough Search.

The prosecutor in this case must search not only for his own files for Brady material, but also the files of other employees of the District Attorney’s Office, including any victim/witness contact personnel, whether paid or volunteers , and any other municipal, county, state or federal agencies involved in this matter, including the U.S. and Texas Securities and Exchange Commission, Texas Attorney General’s Office, Dallas Police Department, the Dallas County Sheriff’s Office, and the United States Department of Justice. See, e.g., Kyles v. Whitney, 514 U.S. 419, 437, 115 S. Ct. 1555, 1567 (1995) (“[T]he individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the other acting on the government’s behalf in the case, including the police.”); United States v. Wood, 57 F.3d 733, 737 (9 th Cir. 1995) (holding that exculpatory material in the possession of the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) files was within the constructive knowledge and possession of the prosecutors because the FDA was involved in the investigation and the FDA was the agency charged with administering the statute at issue); United States v. McVeigh, 954 F. Supp. 1441, 1450 (D. Colo. 1997) (holding that, in their search for Brady material, prosecutors must “inform themselves about everything that is known in all of the archives and all of the data banks of all of the agencies collecting information which could assist in the construction of alternative scenarios to that which they intend to prove at trial”).

C. PRAYER

For these reasons, Defendant Loses requests that the government be required to produce all items enumerated in this Motion.

Dated: May 2, 2006 Respectfully submitted,

David Finn, P.C.

By:

David Finn
MILNER & FINN
2828 North Harwood, Suite 1950
Dallas, Texas 75201
Texas Bar No. 07026900
(214) 651.1121 (telephone)

Counsel for Defendant

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document has been served, via hand-delivery, upon all counsel of record, as identified below, on May 2, 2006:

Mr. Jeff Bray
Assistant District Attorney Workroom
Dallas County District Attorney’s Office
Dallas, Texas

David Finn

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION AND INSPECTION OF BRADY MATERIAL AND/OR INFORMATION WHICH MAY LEAD TO EVIDENCE

CAME ON for consideration Defendant Loses’s Motion for Production and Inspection of Brady Material and/or Information Which May Lead to Evidence and, upon consideration, the Court is of the opinion that said Motion should be granted.

SO ORDERED this ________ day of _________________, 2003.

__________________________________________

JUDGE SUSAN HAWK

Judicial process........you have heard of it ......right?

2007-11-22T00:12:00.000-08:00

Not a single attorney represented solely the interests of school students and their families — who might actually favor the broader educational option

2007-08-13T18:45:00.000-07:00

Send this document to a colleague Close This Window

Footnotes in HTML versions of opinions are designated by superscript “balloons” or boxes (click on either for the footnote text) and are not numbered. For an exact copy of the opinion, retrieve the Adobe PDF version.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

════════════

No. 04-1144

════════════

Shirley Neeley,

Texas Commissioner of Education, et al., Appellants,

v.

West Orange-Cove Consolidated

Independent School District, et al., Appellees

consolidated with

════════════

No. 05-0145

════════════

Alvarado Independent School District,

et al., Appellants,

v.

Shirley Neeley,

Texas Commissioner of Education, et al., Appellees

consolidated with

════════════

No. 05-0148

════════════

Edgewood Independent School District,

et al., Appellants,

v.

Shirley Neeley,

Texas Commissioner of Education, et al., Appellees

════════════════════════════════════════════════════

On Direct Appeal from the

250th District Court of Travis County, Texas

════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Argued July 6, 2005

Justice Brister, dissenting.

In the name of “efficiency,” several school districts again ask the Texas courts to close the Texas public schools unless the Texas Legislature increases funding. Over the last two decades, we have been asked to do this every two or three years, and have generally complied.

The Court goes too far by doing so again today. First, the Court finds school districts are forced to tax at the highest possible rate only because some of them do. Second, though only five percent of the State’s school districts claim a single statute is unconstitutional, the Court enjoins the State from distributing any money under the current Texas school financing system, an order that applies to every school district in Texas. Thus, because some districts get too little state money, all districts may get none. It is hard to see how this will help Texas school children.

Yet the Court also does not go far enough. By failing to demand an “efficient system” as the Texas Constitution requires, or to demand standing and proof as Texas law requires, this case once again focuses on short-term funding rather than long-term solutions.

Of course, the true goal of this litigation is to put pressure on the Texas Legislature. We demanded legislative changes by holding the Texas school-finance system unconstitutional in Edgewood I, Footnote Edgewood II, Footnote and Edgewood III; Footnote we warned that we might do so again soon in Edgewood IV Footnote and West Orange-Cove I. Footnote The Court fulfills that threat today. But there is no end in sight; if the past is any indication, the new funding will not last long, and public education will not change much.

Before we bequeath Edgewood VIII, IX, and X to our grandchildren, we should consider whether we might do more by doing less. As the Court fails to do so today, I respectfully dissent.I. The Constitution & Efficiency

Since statehood in 1845, every Texas Constitution has required the Legislature to “make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of public schools.” Footnote But when Texans adopted the current Constitution in 1876, they added a new word — the Constitution now requires “suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.” Footnote

Were we drafting a constitution today, we might choose a different standard — perhaps an “exemplary” or “comprehensive” or “progressive” or “safe” system of public schools. But in 1876, the people of Texas adopted “efficient” as the constitutional standard, and until that Constitution is amended no court can adopt any other.

When this Court issued Edgewood I in October 1989, we recognized that an “efficient” system would “produce results with little waste.” Footnote Nevertheless, we have applied the term in every case since then to require only one thing — “substantially equal access to similar revenues per pupil at similar levels of tax effort.” Footnote In other words, “efficient” has meant only “equal ability to raise taxes.”

Perhaps this made sense in 1989 — before the Berlin Wall fell, before the Soviet Union collapsed, and before state-run businesses everywhere proved uncompetitive. Perhaps back then a government system was “efficient” if it could get sufficient public funding.

But surely not now. Today, we know that one thing above all else makes service providers efficient: competition. Even formerly communist countries recognize how efficiency is produced — not by protectionism, not by higher taxes, and not by state control, but by freedom for competition.

Yet the school districts that brought this case never once suggested in six-weeks’ evidence that competition might make the Texas school system more efficient. No one considered fundamental reforms that efficiency might demand. No school expert considered whether it might be efficient to consolidate tiny school districts or redundant school administrations. No one asked whether it might be efficient to transfer students across district lines, or transfer funds to private providers that could meet their needs better. Instead, this trial focused entirely on getting more state funding through more taxes — all else in the system to remain exactly the same.

This, of course, is perfectly natural. Few of us welcome competition, not even judges. Footnote Competition is often painful, and requires us to make hard choices we would rather avoid.

But long-standing rules of Texas law do not allow us to wink at these omissions here. First, because Article VII’s education guarantee is a right that belongs to school children rather than school districts, the latter have no standing to assert this claim. Every party in this case was a school district, and every witness in the six-week trial was a school employee or school expert. Not a single attorney represented solely the interests of school students and their families — who might actually favor the broader educational options or lower taxes competition might bring. By overlooking standing, this trial focused too much on the priorities of school districts, and not enough on the priorities of school families.

Second, because Article VIII’s constitutional prohibition of state property taxes is violated only if a school district must tax at the statutory maximum, each district had to prove it was forced to do so. The 47 plaintiff districts alone asserted this, but none proved it. No school district addressed, no expert studied, and none of the trial judge’s 679 findings mentioned why districts were “forced” to make expenditures that other public and private schools often forego, or that other government entities often provide. Nor did anyone consider whether competition or other fundamental reforms might make the system more efficient so that less money was necessary. By lowering the burden of proof, this trial focused on whether school expenditures were reasonable rather than required.

My colleagues say our review of “efficiency” must be limited to funding because “[w]e cannot dictate how the parties present their case.” Footnote This Court is not usually such a pushover. When we interpret contracts, statutes, and (above all) constitutions, we are constrained by what they say, not the parties’ briefs. The constitutional guarantee invoked here requires an efficient system of public schools; it cannot be used to demand more funding for an inefficient system.

Nor can we avoid our duty by suggesting that the Legislature demand efficiency when we will not. Footnote If efficiency is a justiciable question (as the Court holds), then we cannot simply suggest that someone else look into it.

The author of the current school-finance system testified at trial that school districts “were no more wasteful or inefficient than any other State agency or State institution.” But that is not the constitutional standard. For whatever reason, the Texas Constitution mandates efficiency primarily in the State’s courts Footnote and schools; Footnote they must meet a higher standard because that is what the Constitution requires. If “efficiency” truly means “producing results with little waste,” then someday we ought to apply it to that purpose.

II. Article VII & StandingA general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.

Texas Constitution, Article VII, § 1While acknowledging evidence that the public school finance system is inadequate, unsuitable, and inefficient, the Court nevertheless finds no violation of Article VII because “an impending constitutional violation is not an existing one.” Footnote We have tried this before, accepting the current system while lamenting it, and warning that the result might be different next time. Footnote

But this is the first time we have entertained such complaints in a courtroom with no students. While standing normally requires only an allegation of injury, a two-part test governs standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute: (1) an allegation of actual or threatened injury under the statute, and (2) an allegation that the statute unconstitutionally restricts the plaintiff’s own rights. Footnote As all concede, the public-education guarantee in Article VII of the Texas Constitution is a right that belongs to school students, not school districts. Yet only the latter were represented at trial, and as the trial made clear, the interests of the two are not necessarily the same.

Standing is required by two guarantees in the Texas Constitution — separation of powers Footnote and open courts. Footnote We should not violate these two constitutional provisions in order to decide whether the State violated two others.

A. A Question We Have Never Addressed

This is the first Article VII school-finance case brought solely by school districts, without a single family or school student as plaintiff.

In Edgewood I, 68 school districts and “numerous individual school children and parents” filed suit. Footnote Edgewood II involved subsequent proceedings in the same suit with the same parties. Footnote Edgewood III was brought by “numerous school districts and individual citizens.” Footnote Edgewood IV was filed by “hundreds of school districts . . . as well as many parents and local officials.” Footnote

None of these cases approved school-district standing under Article VII. Nor did they approve such standing implicitly, as standing cannot be waived and may be raised during any later appeal. Footnote

To the contrary, in Edgewood IV, we held that section 3 of Article VII granted no constitutional rights to school districts:

Article VII, section 3 does not create any “rights.” It only authorizes the Legislature to establish school districts and to empower the districts to levy taxes for specific purposes. The school districts’ rights, to the extent they exist, are derived solely from the statutes that the Legislature may enact under the authority granted in section 3. Footnote

Similarly, section 1 of Article VII does not create any rights for school districts; in fact, it does not even mention them. To the extent school districts assert injury here, they cannot do so for any violation of this constitutional right.

While school districts participated in all our prior Article VII cases, their standing was immaterial because school families participated too. When several parties make the same claim for declaratory or injunctive relief, standing for some renders standing for the remainder immaterial. Footnote Federal law is to the same effect. Footnote As all our prior cases included parties whose sole interest was the education of their children, the State had nothing to gain by objecting to school-district standing, and the judgments would have been no different if it had.

There is certainly no “broad rule that a governmental entity cannot sue to declare a statute unconstitutional.” Footnote But there is no broad rule that they always have such standing either. Just because school districts have standing to bring some claims does not mean they have standing to bring all claims.

Instead, standing depends on the nature and source of the claim being made. Footnote While school districts have standing to pursue an Article VIII claim, Footnote that does not mean they have standing to pursue an Article VII claim. We have never suggested otherwise, until today.

B. Standing We Have Never Recognized

Before today, we have never held that government agencies have standing to sue the State for a bigger budget.

The school districts allege they have insufficient money to carry out their duties, but it is not money for their own account. As we held long ago, school districts hold money only as trustees for school students:

School funds are held to be trust funds for educational purposes. Such funds do not belong to the district or to the officers of the district, but are merely held by them in trust for the public. Footnote

The injury alleged in this case was suffered only by school students: to the extent school districts must cut courses, or eliminate extracurriculars, or hire less-qualified teachers, it is the students who suffer the concrete, personal harm rather than the districts themselves.

The school districts alleged only that inadequate state funding limited their ability to perform their official duties. Both state and federal courts have rejected standing by government officials to bring such claims. Footnote Thus, we held in Brown v. Todd that a city councilman lacked standing to challenge a mayor’s personnel policy that did not apply to him, but merely infringed his ability to set such policies. Footnote Similarly, the United States Supreme Court recently held that grant recipients but not members of Congress had standing to challenge the Line Item Veto Act(though the Act granted standing to both), as the former actually lost money while the latter lost only their discretionary power to dispense it. Footnote

This is not a case like Nootsie, Ltd. v. Williamson County Appraisal District, in which a public entity was compelled to affirmatively grant a tax exemption it believed unconstitutional. Footnote The districts do not complain that they are affirmatively compelled to perform unconstitutional teaching, testing, or any other services; they complain only that they are underfunded.

The Court’s suggestion that we have recognized standing before in these circumstances is indefensible. In Vondy v. Commissioners Court, we ordered commissioners to pay a constitutionally required salary when they had refused to pay any. Footnote In Mays v. Fifth Court of Appeals, we ordered commissioners to pay a statutorily allowed raise which they had ignored. Footnote Both cases involved nondiscretionary ministerial acts; Footnote neither involved a dispute between an agency and the State about whether the former’s budget was big enough.

The Court justifies standing here because “the Legislature has required school districts to achieve the goal of a general diffusion of knowledge.” Footnote But that gives them no rights against the State. As we noted in Edgewood IV, the State can abolish school districts completely, or enlarge or diminish their powers. Footnote Further, the Texas Constitution requires the Legislature to provide for many things — roads and bridges, Footnote the Legislative Redistricting Board, Footnote the Judicial Conduct Commission, Footnote and the salaries of thousands of public employees. Footnote These are all important items, and some may be underfunded; but surely all do not have standing to sue the State for more.

In every analysis of standing, “the plaintiff must contend that the statute unconstitutionally restricts the plaintiff's rights, not somebody else’s.” Footnote This the school districts cannot do.

C. Priorities We Have Never Approved

One reason courts require standing is amply demonstrated by the evidence in this trial, which tended toward a wish-list for school district employees.

Eight superintendents testified for the school districts at trial, each listing what they needed or what they would do if they had more money. Their priorities were almost identical: more bilingual teachers, more certified teachers, more certified librarians, more teacher training, higher salaries, better benefits, smaller classes, and longer school years.

Each of these may be important. But if eight families from the same districts had testified at trial, is this what they would have listed? Assuming all could not be fully funded, would they have listed them in the same order? We simply do not know.

We do know that, for most of us, our priority as employees is higher salaries, while our priority as customers is lower prices. Both may be possible when competition increases efficiency, innovation, and productivity. But at some point the two inevitably conflict, and some compromise is necessary. Because the trial here included only education providers and no education customers, the evidence may not accurately reflect where that line should be drawn.

Moreover, fundamental reforms may be overlooked if school districts may assert Article VII claims by themselves. Here, for example, not a single expert witness studied the possible savings that might accrue from consolidating some of the State’s 1,031 school districts. This Court has repeatedly lamented the “crazy-quilt pattern of small school districts,” Footnote as a result of which “duplicative administrative costs are unavoidable.” Footnote The plaintiffs’ experts confirmed that smaller districts have “the highest level of expenditures per student, as one would expect,” because of “diseconomies of scale.” Yet not a single school district or expert witness suggested any consolidations. Footnote

It is unrealistic to ask school boards and administrators to recommend their own abolition, or lower salaries for themselves or any employees. Such potential conflicts between the interests of school districts and school families prevent the former from claiming standing to represent the latter. We have recognized representative standing in some circumstances, Footnote and sometimes state agencies may assert standing on behalf of their constituents. Footnote But we have done so only when the goals of a group and its members are so closely aligned that there is no reason to require participation by one in a suit by the other. Footnote That is not the case here.

In its final analysis, the Court dispenses with standing generally, because (1) students and families were free to intervene, and (2) the districts could find students and families to back their claims. Even if we assume that poor families can hire lawyers, or school districts can recruit sham plaintiffs to bolster their claims, it is hard to see what that has to do with the standing of the parties actually before us. More important, such arguments could be made by every party who lacks standing, including millions of taxpayers, Footnote or the father whose challenge to the Pledge of Allegiance was recently rejected for lack of standing. Footnote Normally, this Court strictly enforces standing so that we retain our proper role; Footnote hopefully today’s exception is good for this case only.

Standing is not a technicality; it is essential to any court’s authority to decide a case. Footnote We cannot abandon it in noteworthy cases; indeed, that is when adherence to legal standards is most important. As the United States Supreme Court recently noted, courts must be “especially rigorous” in requiring proper standing when asked to declare the actions of the other two branches of government unconstitutional. Footnote The school districts alone cannot meet such standards here.

III. Article VIII & Discretion

No State ad valorem taxes shall be levied upon any property within this State.

Texas Constitution, Article VIII, § 1-e

The 47 plaintiffs, mostly property-rich school districts, bring a claim that Article VIII, section 1-e of the Texas Constitution is violated by a tax-rate ceiling in a single subpart of a single statute. Footnote Unlike Article VII, Article VIII was intended to benefit school districts, and thus they have standing to assert this claim. Footnote

In Edgewood III, we declined to adopt a precise test for violations of Article VIII because state control over property taxes presents “a spectrum of possibilities.” Footnote Instead, we held that a tax violates Article VIII if the State so completely controls the levy, assessment, and disbursement of revenue that school districts are “without meaningful discretion.” Footnote In Edgewood IV, we explained that districts lose such discretion when they are “forced to tax at the maximum allowable rate just to provide a general diffusion of knowledge.” Footnote

This appeal turns on whether the plaintiffs proved they were “forced” to tax at the maximum rate. In reviewing the evidence, the Court contradicts everything we have said about such evidence before, and adds new “factors” we apparently overlooked before. This is too imprecise; a legal standard cannot turn on entirely different evidence from one case to the next.

A. The Wrong Standard: Everybody Else Does It

The Court points to several statewide trends as evidence of an Article VIII violation. But in our previous cases, we held that evidence just like this could not show an Article VIII violation.

First, my colleagues suggest that school districts are forced to tax at maximum rates because about half of them do. While we have never stated in detail what the Article VIII standard means, we have stated one thing it does not mean — “the number of districts taxing at maximum rates is not determinative.” Footnote In West Orange-Cove I, we expressly rejected arguments that an unconstitutional state property tax must control the rates in every district (the State’s position) or most districts (the trial court’s conclusion); instead, we held that an ad valorem tax is unconstitutional if it is imposed by the State, no matter how many districts it covers. Footnote If the State could not use prevailing tax rates to prove the school districts should lose, why can the school districts now use them to prove they should win?

Second, the Court reverses field by concluding that close-to-maximum rates show that many districts lack meaningful discretion. Only two years ago, we said close counts neither way: “It may be that a school district taxing at $1.47 instead of $1.50 has exercised meaningful discretion, but that is not necessarily the case.” Footnote The number of districts taxing in this range simply cannot tell us whether “a single district . . . is constrained by the State to tax at [this] particular rate.” Footnote

Third, the Court finds it important that districts are taxing and spending 97 percent of the revenue that would be available if every district taxed at maximum rates. Footnote But in Edgewood IV we noted, and school district witnesses conceded at trial, that financial incentives in the current school-finance system encourage school districts to tax at maximum rates even if they don’t have to. Footnote The current system does not force districts to tax at maximum rates merely by providing incentives for them to do so.

Fourth, the Court announces today that substantial transfers of tax revenues from rich districts to poor districts are “a significant factor” in rendering the current system unconstitutional. Footnote Of course, we demanded something along these very lines when we required equalized funding in Edgewood I. Further, we held such transfers constitutional in Edgewood IV; Footnote today’s opinion appears to adopt the dissent in the latter case. Footnote

Finally, the Court supports its constitutional conclusion by noting a “marked decline” since 2001 in the number of districts that “exceed minimum accreditation standards.” Footnote We have never before tied constitutional analysis to testing or accreditation scores, and today’s reference shows why we should be reluctant to enter that hotly debated area. For example, if the base year in this trend were 1994 rather than 2001, then there has been a marked increase in the number of districts exceeding minimum standards. Further, as the standards themselves are rising, declining scores may or may not reflect actual declines. And the “minimum” standard referenced here is “academically acceptable”; nothing in this rating system proves the State is “forcing” every school district to rate above average.

Surely we were not mistaken in all our previous cases. If revenue transfers and accreditation scores were relevant to Article VIII’s standard, it is curious that we have never mentioned them before. And merely looking at average tax rates cannot tell us whether any district was “forced” to that level or arrived there via “meaningful discretion.”

Whether any school district in Texas has lost “meaningful discretion” is not a standard that can be proved by statewide trends. School districts are not forced to tax or spend money just because everyone else does it. Footnote The standards this Court has established require more specific evidence of a violation of Article VIII.

B. The Right Standard: What Must This District Do?

The school districts cannot establish a violation of Article VIII by proving that their current budgets are customary, or even reasonable; the tax cap they challenge is unconstitutional only if they proved they were forced to tax at that rate.

By definition, districts are not “forced” to make discretionary or voluntary expenditures. Of course, some expenditures may be mandatory de facto, even though not mandatory de jure. Footnote For example, Texas school boards or administrators who cut football programs or drill teams (as the State’s attorneys bravely suggest) may soon find themselves looking for other occupations.

But the Court adopts a standard far too low by holding that districts are “forced” to tax at maximum rates whenever their “professional judgment and experience” suggests they should. Footnote Undoubtedly, school districts want to give their students the best education possible, and an educator’s professional judgment would deem anything less to be undesirable. But in Edgewood IV, we rejected a claim that districts were “forced” to transfer revenues “because the various alternatives are all undesirable.” Footnote By equating professional preferences with coercion, my colleagues again follow the dissent rather than the majority in Edgewood IV. Footnote

The districts did offer examples of expenditures that were mandatory, and programs that were cut. But as proof that districts are forced to tax at maximum rates, both are non sequiturs. Proving that some programs are mandatory does not prove that all others are too. Nor does it follow from cuts in one program that no further cuts can be made. To the contrary, the reluctance the superintendents expressed at trial about such cuts served to prove, if anything, their reluctance to cut any programs at all.

Moreover, the State’s trial evidence of discretionary spending did not focus on remedial-reading or bilingual-education programs. Instead, the State pointed to undisputed expenditures for swimming pools, nature trails, athletic stadiums, tennis courts, and unconventional classes such as broadcast journalism, ceramics, power lifting, ballet, film critique, lego robotics, advanced mariachi, and culinary arts.

It is true that several superintendents testified that all these programs were needed to keep students in school. But if we take these claims at face value then nothing schools spend is discretionary. “[A] claim will not stand or fall on the mere ipse dixit of a credentialed witness.” Footnote These opinions alone cannot support the trial court’s judgment, both because they are conclusory, Footnote and because the question is a legal one. Footnote This Court is not usually so generous in treating such testimony as “facts, not opinions.” Footnote

Further, none of the school districts explained why they were “forced” to maintain athletic facilities or library services that local governments often provide, or unconventional classes that might be available through local community colleges or the internet. No one would suggest that communities can run their fire, police, or utility departments through a school district’s budget, thus shifting those costs to the State or richer districts. The trial court could not simply assume there were no alternative providers; the school districts had to prove it.

Similarly, several superintendents conceded paying the highest starting salaries in their region, or special stipends to attract particular types of teachers. Considering the importance of what they do, no one can begrudge teachers higher salaries; but these contribute to a violation of Article VIII only if school districts had no choice. If surrounding public or private schools pay less, it was the districts’ burden to prove why they could not.

When pressed to explain such expenses, district witnesses repeatedly pointed to the demands of their local communities. But again, local demand must be proved, not merely asserted. As no students or families testified at trial, the only proof was the conclusory assurances of school administrators.

In a democracy, community demand is proved by elections, not anecdotal hearsay. In many instances, schools can buy property using school bonds (which require electoral approval) or the general operations budget (which does not). We cannot tell from this record which programs had been approved at an election, or what percentage of the community actually participated. Surely a district cannot avoid elections on expensive programs, or schedule them to ensure low voter turnout, Footnote and then claim they were forced to adopt those programs by their community. Footnote Without such proof here, we simply cannot tell.

Finally, because fundamental reforms were never considered, we do not know whether they might allow districts to drop rates below the tax ceiling. School districts cannot spend money inefficiently (subverting Article VII) to “force” themselves to the tax ceiling (subverting Article VIII), as these articles must be construed consistently to give effect to both. Footnote School districts may have good reasons to avoid consolidating, or starting school later in the year, or increasing class size so that teachers’ salaries could be increased too. But they are forced to make current expenses only if saving money through such alternatives was impossible, not just unpopular.

Of course, had the trial judge required specific evidence that the districts were forced to incur substantially all their current expenses, it would have been much more difficult for the districts to prove an Article VIII violation. But proving a statute unconstitutional is not supposed to be easy. We must presume the current system is constitutional, and interpret it whenever possible in a manner that renders it so. Footnote This presumption is “especially strong” when statutes relate to taxation, Footnote and “especially important” when we deal with politically charged subjects like the schools. Footnote

There was plenty of evidence at trial that public schools are being asked to carry increasingly heavy burdens, burdens that private schools often do not bear. For example, as one superintendent noted, “it is not easy to remove employees in the public sector.” Accountability and testing systems have raised expectations that somehow all schools and school children can be at or above average. Teachers and administrators face the risk that the failure of their students will cause their own professional efforts to be labeled “academically unacceptable.” And as all the witnesses agreed, a growing stream of immigrants with little formal schooling or English proficiency requires that public schools not only leave no child behind, but go back at great expense and pick up more as soon as they arrive. Footnote

Nevertheless, the Article VIII standard is not whether educational expenditures are reasonable, or important, or far-sighted, or what a community would prefer, but whether a district is forced to make them. Before the courts can declare the State’s school-finance system unconstitutional, each and every district must prove it had no other choice. Here, none did.

IV. Equity & Overbroad Relief

Permanent injunctions “must be narrowly drawn,” Footnote and “the record must contain evidence supporting each injunctive provision.” Footnote This one meets neither standard.

It is neither true nor “worth repeating” that these standards can be ignored because the State asks for no injunction rather than a narrower one. A court must craft an equitable injunction even if it is not precisely what either party wants. Footnote If the rule were otherwise, the Court should not postpone the injunction here until June 2006 — as neither party asked for that. Hopefully, today’s rule is once again good for today’s case only.

A. Too Many Districts

First, there is no evidence to support a constitutional violation in every school district in Texas.

Out of 1,031 school districts in Texas, only 329 filed suit, only 47 asserted the single constitutional claim the Court affirms, only 9 presented proof on that claim in any detail, and only 3 called a witness to prove it at trial. On this narrow basis, the Court declares the school-finance system in every district unconstitutional, and enjoins state funding for them all. This is too broad.

As we recently noted, it has always been the law of equity that a permanent injunction “must not grant relief which is . . . more comprehensive or restrictive than justified by the pleadings, the evidence, and the usages of equity.” Footnote Thus, for example, a permanent injunction against protests at five physicians’ homes is too broad if the evidence shows protests occurred at only four. Footnote Similarly, evidence of flies and foul odors from a 10-acre feedlot does not justify a permanent injunction extending to an entire 450-acre ranch. Footnote An injunction may extend as far as the evidence, but no further.

In their Article VIII claim, the plaintiffs did not challenge the tax-rate cap facially, Footnote but only as it applied to them. “In an as-applied constitutional challenge, we must evaluate the statute as it operates in practice against the particular plaintiff.” Footnote Yet the trial court did not even try to evaluate how the property-tax cap operates in practice against most of the 47 plaintiffs, much less the other 984 districts covered by the statewide permanent injunction. As the question is one of constitutionality, we cannot simply presume that all districts are alike.

The trial judge pointed to evidence from nine “focus districts” and the testimony of a dozen superintendents as proof that loss of meaningful discretion was “systemic/statewide.” But there was no evidence these districts were statistically representative of all others. To the contrary, the handful of successful focus districts were unrepresentative — 78 percent of the plaintiffs’ focus districts were poor districts, while 72 percent of the actual plaintiffs were rich ones.

Nor did the parties agree that proof about the focus districts proved anything about the rest. Even if they had, such an agreement would be unenforceable. In Terrazas v. Ramirez, we reversed a permanent injunction that ordered election redistricting based on an agreement by all the parties (including the Governor and Attorney General), Footnote noting that such agreements are generally unenforceable in cases affecting the public:

Apportionment affects every person in the State, yet only a very few parties can be involved in any lawsuit challenging redistricting. The trial court must attempt to consider the interests, not only of the parties in the case, but of others who are not present. For this reason, the agreement of the parties in a reapportionment lawsuit cannot alone be conclusive of either the validity of the statute or, if it is found to be invalid, the relief to be granted. Footnote

Similarly, as schools and property taxes affect far more Texans than the parties at this trial (none of whom, again, were simply taxpayers or families of school children), the trial court could not grant relief covering districts as to which there was no proof. Footnote

In a state as diverse as Texas, some programs and expenses may be mandatory in one district, but supplemental in another. Even if a dozen districts proved that they were forced to incur all their expenditures (which none did), that would not justify an injunction extending beyond them. Footnote

This is not a class action. No class has been certified, and given the individual ways in which each school district spends money, it is unlikely any could be. But even if one was, we could not grant relief extending to nonparty school districts without a “rigorous analysis.” Footnote Yet the Court today grants a statewide injunction affecting hundreds of nonparty school districts without class certification, evidence, analysis, or even an explanation. This looks too much like “enjoin now and worry later.” Footnote

B. Too Many Statutes

Second, there is no evidence to support an injunction against every statutory aspect of the Texas school-finance system.

The Court finds only one constitutional violation — that the tax-rate ceiling in subsection 45.003(d) of the Education Code violates Article VIII. As already noted, there is no evidence showing this is the case in every school district in Texas. But even if there were, that would justify nothing beyond declaring this one subsection unconstitutional.

When we declared a single provision of the Water Code an unconstitutional delegation to landowners, we did not enjoin all water quality regulations in Texas. Footnote When we found a single provision of the Tax Code unconstitutional, we did not enjoin all taxes; to the contrary, we reformed the lower court’s injunction to make it narrower. Footnote When we found an absolute two-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims unconstitutional as applied to minors, we did not enjoin the entire statute but merely tolled limitations for minors. Footnote

In each of these cases, we narrowly limited our orders to the legislation we found unconstitutional. By the same standard, if the Legislature imposed a property tax on the nine Texas counties whose names begin with “J”, surely we would declare only that statute unconstitutional; we would not stop all state funding in those counties, much less in the other 245.

But today the Court does precisely that, finding one subsection unconstitutional as applied to nine focus districts, and then affirming an injunction against the entire Texas school-finance system. This injunction includes most of Chapters 41 and 42 of the Texas Education Code — a collection of almost 100 different statutes. This is far too broad.

The Court acknowledges that the single violation here could be corrected by limiting relief to that single statute. Footnote But it imposes far more sweeping relief, on the ground that we must “leave such matters to the discretion of the Legislature.” Footnote In other words, rather than enjoining a single statute in a handful of districts, the Court enjoins scores of statutes across the entire State — in deference to the Legislature. Reasonable people may question whether this is very much deference.

It is true that we have enjoined the entire school-finance system before, but never for grounds as limited as those here. Footnote In Edgewood I and II, there was a “fundamental flaw” in the system, “not in any particular provisions but in its overall failure to restructure the system.” Footnote By holding that Article VII required the entire system to “draw revenue from all property at a substantially similar rate,” Footnote our ruling could not be narrowly limited to a small part.

Similarly, because the statute we held unconstitutional in Edgewood III mandated a state property tax in every Texas county, the injunction we issued had to cover every county too. Footnote Nor could we limit relief to the portion of the system held unconstitutional, as there would have been little financing left over for schools without it. Footnote

By comparison, nothing about the Article VIII claim here inevitably extends to the whole school-finance system. Surely a single violation of Article VIII anywhere cannot justify an injunction shutting down school finances everywhere.

The Court says the current system cannot survive without the tax-rate cap, because “for districts that need additional revenue, the funding system would be inefficient.” Footnote But the Court cannot have it both ways — if school districts “need” more funding, then current funding cannot be adequate for a general diffusion of knowledge; conversely, if the current funding is adequate (as the Court explicitly holds), then the cap only affects supplemental spending. As the Texas Constitution does not guarantee equal supplemental spending, Footnote the cap is hardly “central” to a constitutional system. Footnote

Of course, it is no mystery why the plaintiff school districts never asked for narrower relief. If only section 45.003(d) were declared unconstitutional, they would once again have meaningful discretion to set tax rates as they wish, and could raise them to pay for all the programs they say their communities demand. But they also might find out at the next election that their beliefs about community demand were somewhat exaggerated.

Instead, by enjoining school-finance across the state, the school districts here hope to obtain funding from sources other than those within their own borders. Raising revenues from outside sources is unlikely to make school districts more accountable or more efficient. Neither equity nor the Texas Constitution allows school districts to demand supplemental programs on condition that someone else pay for them.

* * *

The Court closes by reminding the Legislature how important education is to the future of this State and its people. This seems an odd way to conclude an opinion that rejects every claim except that the Legislature has imposed a statewide ad valorem tax. If our goal is to improve education, we should not enjoin the entire school-finance system on collateral grounds to pressure the Legislature to change it.

But we should demand efficiency, as that is what the Texas Constitution requires. Recognizing the common meaning of “efficient” would not require us to abandon our previous school-finance cases, or the equity for Texas schools they require. But we cannot keep overlooking the one standard the Texas Constitution explicitly demands. Nor do we help Texas school children by insisting “efficient” means nothing beyond equal access to taxes.

Someday, the Texas school system must become “efficient” by 21st century standards. As that is what the Texas Constitution requires, we should start that process today.

________________________________

Scott Brister

Justice

OPINION DELIVERED: November 22, 2005

Raised to the Infinity Power Squared: Infinity "raised to the power" of 2

2007-06-30T01:47:00.000-07:00

Raised to the Infinity Power Squared: Infinity "raised to the power" of 2

watt they need to pass to compete is......Halo.....ACT, SAT,MFAT,LSAT.......KItty bar the Bar EXAMine.....WATT IS FAIR!

2007-06-30T01:37:00.001-07:00

Siverand v state, Trest v Cain, Saldano v State, McCleskey v Kemp, Confession of Error...Justice is done

2007-06-28T06:41:00.000-07:00

These are college seniors. Among the institutions whose students were surveyed: Dartmouth, Yale, Harvard, the University of California at Berkeley, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Michigan.

It should go without saying that in a republic, civic education is a fundamental necessity. If even our elite college graduates have no idea what the First Amendment does, the country is in trouble.

ISYS
ISYSweb 6 document view for United States Court of Appeals

First hit Next document Previous document Native WordPerfect View image Back to results New search

+ United States Court of Appeals
* FILED
o March 23, 2004
o I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
o II. INTERVENTION
o A. Standard of Review
o B. Intervention as of Right
o III. GRANT OF HABEAS RELIEF

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

Back to top

FILED

March 23, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

REVISED APRIL 8, 2004

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-40905

VICTOR HUGO Previous DocumentSALDANONext Hit

Petitioner - Appellee

DOUG DRETKE, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION

Respondent - Appellee

v.

JOHN R ROACH, District Attorney of Collin County, Texas

Movant Plaintiff - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

Before KING, Chief Judge, and SMITH and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

KING, Chief Judge:

Victor Hugo Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit was convicted of a capital offense and sentenced to death. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit subsequently filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in federal court challenging his sentence. John R. Roach, the District Attorney of Collin County, Texas, appeals the district court’s denial of his application to intervene as of right in Saldano’s habeas corpus suit. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and dismiss in part.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In 1996, a Texas jury convicted Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit of capital murder. During the punishment phase of Saldano’s trial, the Collin County District Attorney (“District Attorney”) called Dr. Walter Quijano, a psychologist, to testify as an expert witness. Dr. Quijano provided the jury with a list of twenty-four unweighted factors that he advised the jury to use in evaluating Saldano’s future dangerousness. One of the factors was race. As to this factor, Dr. Quijano stated that Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit was Hispanic, pointed out that Hispanics were over-represented in the Texas prison system, and opined that there was a correlation between race and ethnicity and future dangerousness. During closing arguments, the District Attorney reminded the jury to consider the twenty- four factors laid out by Dr. Quijano when assessing Saldano’s future dangerousness. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit did not object either to Dr. Quijano’s testimony or to the District Attorney’s reference to it during his closing argument; instead, he met Dr. Quijano’s testimony through cross- examination and the presentation of a rebuttal witness.

After hearing all the evidence, the jury found that there was a probability that Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society. In addition, the jury found insufficient mitigating circumstances to warrant life imprisonment rather than the death penalty. Consequently, the trial judge sentenced Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit to death.

Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit appealed directly to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, claiming that he had been denied due process of law because his race and ethnicity were improperly used to support a finding of future dangerousness during the punishment phase of his trial. The District Attorney argued that, because Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit did not object to Dr. Quijano’s testimony, Saldano’s claim was procedurally barred by Texas’s contemporaneous objection rule. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Saldano’s conviction and sentence, after finding that Saldano’s claim was, indeed, procedurally barred.

The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari. Before the Supreme Court, the Attorney General of the State of Texas assumed representation of the State. 1 The Attorney General confessed error in Saldano’s sentencing and declined to raise Saldano’s procedural default as a defense. The Supreme Court vacated the judgment against Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit and “remanded to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas for further consideration in light of the confession of error.” Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit v. Texas , 530 U.S. 1212, 1212 (2000). 2

On remand, the State Prosecuting Attorney, 3 with the District Attorney’s help, represented the State before the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Attorney General submitted a brief as amicus curiae. Once again, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that Saldano’s claim was procedurally barred. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit v. State , 70 S.W.3d 873, 891 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (en banc).

Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit subsequently petitioned the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas for a writ of habeas corpus. The Attorney General--representing Doug Dretke, in his official capacity as Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division--confessed error and waived Saldano’s procedural default. The District Attorney filed an application to intervene as of right to oppose Saldano’s petition on procedural-default and harmless-error grounds. The district court held that the political-question doctrine prevented it from considering the merits of the District Attorney’s application for intervention. 4

The District Attorney appealed. In Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit v. O’Connell , 322 F.3d 365, 371 (5th Cir. 2003), we held that the district court erred in finding that the District Attorney’s application for intervention presented it with a non-justiciable political question. Therefore, we reversed the district court’s order and remanded the District Attorney’s application to the district court for disposition on the merits. Id.

On remand, the district court denied the District Attorney’s application for intervention and granted Saldano’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit v. Cockrell , 267 F. Supp. 2d 635 (E.D. Tex. 2003). The District Attorney appeals both the order denying his application for intervention and the judgment granting Saldano’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Director Dretke did not appeal the district court’s judgment, but he did file a brief in opposition to the District Attorney’s appeal.

II. INTERVENTION

A. Standard of Review

This court reviews de novo a district court’s decision to deny an application for intervention under Rule 24(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Sierra Club v. Espy , 18 F.3d 1202, 1205 (5th Cir. 1994); cf. 6 James Wm. Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 24.24[2][b], at 24-94 to 24-95 (3d ed. 2003) (describing circuit split). 5

B. Intervention as of Right

Intervention as of right under Rule 24(a)(2) is proper when:

(1) the motion to intervene is timely; (2) the potential intervener asserts an interest that is related to the property or transaction that forms the basis of the controversy in the case into which she seeks to intervene; (3) the disposition of that case may impair or impede the potential intervener’s ability to protect her interest; and (4) the existing parties do not adequately represent the potential intervener’s interest.

Doe v. Glickman , 256 F.3d 371, 375 (5th Cir. 2001). The District Attorney claims that he meets all four of Rule 24(a)(2)’s requirements. The district court, however, ruled that the District Attorney did not meet the second requirement for intervention because he had failed to “establish that his direct, substantial, legally protectable interests [would] be impaired or impeded by the disposition of th[e] case in his absence as a party.” Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit , 267 F. Supp. 2d at 641. We agree.

To meet the second requirement for Rule 24(a)(2) intervention, a potential intervenor must demonstrate that he has an interest that is related to the property or transaction that forms the basis of the controversy. Doe , 256 F.3d at 375. Not any interest, however, is sufficient; the interest must be “direct, substantial, [and] legally protectable.” Id. at 379 (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted). We have explained that “the interest [must] be one which the substantive law recognizes as belonging to or being owned by the applicant.” New Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc. v. United Gas Pipe Line Co. , 732 F.2d 452, 464 (5th Cir. 1984) (en banc). In addition, the intervenor should be the real party in interest regarding his claim. Id.

In this suit against Director Dretke, the real party in interest is the State of Texas. See Diamond v. Charles , 476 U.S. 54, 57 n.2 (1986) (“A suit against a state officer in his official capacity is, of course, a suit against the State.”). And, although the District Attorney claims to have the authority to act as the State’s representative in this case, state law provides otherwise. Under Texas law, a district attorney’s duties and responsibilities are defined by statute. State v. Allen , 32 Tex. 273, 275 (1869). Texas law does not grant district attorneys the authority to represent either state officials, such as Director Dretke, or the State in a federal habeas corpus proceeding. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 2.01 (Vernon Supp. 2004) (outlining the duties of district attorneys). 6 Instead, as the District Attorney concedes, Texas law gives the Attorney General the authority to represent Director Dretke and the State in suits such as this. See Sierra Club v. City of San Antonio , 115 F.3d 311, 314 (5th Cir. 1997) (“Under Texas law, the Attorney General enjoys an exclusive right to represent state agencies; other attorneys who may be permitted to assist the Attorney General are subordinate to his authority.”); League of United Latin Am. Citizens, Council No. 4434 v. Clements , 999 F.2d 831, 844 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc) (“The Attorney General may represent state officials in their official capacities . . . .”).

Furthermore, since the Attorney General is properly representing the State in this case, Texas law does not permit the District Attorney to assume representation of the State as well. Under Texas law, “either the Attorney General or a county or district attorney may represent the State in a particular situation, but these are the only choices, whichever official represents the State exercises exclusive authority and if services of other lawyers are utilized, they must be ‘in subordination’ to his authority.” Hill v. Tex. Water Quality Bd. , 568 S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. Civ. App.--Austin 1978, writ ref’d n.r.e.); cf. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit , 70 S.W.3d at 883 (“[T]he State has only one interest in a criminal case, and the State can be represented by only one attorney in making such decisions as whether to seek review and whether to confess error.”). As the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals aptly noted in a state habeas appeal: “In every appeal, such decisions must be made as whether to appeal, . . . what points to raise[,] whether to confess error, . . . whether to seek further review and on what grounds. Some one person must make these decisions; there cannot be conflicting decisions.” Ex Parte Taylor , 36 S.W.3d 883, 887 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (en banc) (per curiam). In sum, Texas law does not grant the District Attorney the authority to represent the State here. Thus, the District Attorney’s interest in this case is not “one which the substantive law recognizes as belonging to or being owned by the applicant.” New Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc. , 732 F.2d at 464. Nevertheless, the District Attorney argues that his intervention is proper in light of Baker v. Wade , 769 F.2d 289 (5th Cir. 1985) (en banc), overruled on other grounds by Lawrence v. Texas , 123 S. Ct. 2472 (2003). In Baker , a federal district court ruled that Texas’s sodomy statute was unconstitutional and enjoined a class of Texas officials from enforcing the statute. Id. at 291. A district attorney, who was an unnamed member of the defendant class, sought to appeal the district court’s judgment, since the Attorney General had declined to do so. Id. The district attorney filed a motion to intervene and to be named a class representative, and a Fifth Circuit judge granted the motion. Id. The en banc court ruled that the district attorney had a sufficient interest in the suit for purposes of intervention because he had been specifically enjoined by the district court from enforcing Texas’s sodomy statute and, thus, his power to enforce the State’s criminal laws had been impaired. Id. at 291-92.

The District Attorney’s reliance on Baker is misplaced. Unlike the district attorney in Baker , who was an unnamed member of the defendant class, the District Attorney is not a party to this case. Therefore, the District Attorney is not legally bound by the district court’s decision to grant habeas relief in the same way in which the district attorney in Baker was bound. 7 Furthermore, in Baker , the injunction clearly impaired the district attorney’s ability to carry out his official duties under state law because it prevented him from enforcing one of Texas’s criminal laws. Here, by contrast, the District Attorney has not been prevented from performing his duties under Texas law because he may still seek the death penalty in this and other cases. 8 Thus, the District Attorney has not demonstrated that his interest in this case is “substantial” and “legally cognizable” like the district attorney’s interest in Baker . Consequently, while intervention was proper in Baker , it is not proper under the facts of this case. 9

It is true that the District Attorney will be affected, as a practical matter, by the district court’s order. The District Attorney certainly worked hard to obtain a conviction and to defend the conviction and sentence on appeal. Understandably, the District Attorney does not wish to undergo the costs and burdens of conducting a new sentencing hearing. If this were a sufficient interest to justify intervention, however, a state district attorney would be able to intervene in almost any habeas corpus suit where he did not agree with the Attorney General’s method of representing the State. This outcome would be contrary to state law, which has chosen the Attorney General, rather than the various district attorneys, to represent the State in federal habeas corpus suits.

Furthermore, even if the District Attorney’s interest in this suit were sufficient to permit his intervention, we would nevertheless conclude that Rule 24 intervention is improper because the District Attorney has not demonstrated that he meets the fourth requirement for intervention: that his interest is inadequately represented by the existing parties. Doe , 256 F.3d at 375. To meet this requirement, a potential intervenor must show that the representation of his interest by existing parties to the suit “ ‘may be’” inadequate. Edwards v. City of Houston , 78 F.3d 983, 1005 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc) (quoting Trbovich v. United Mine Workers of Am. , 404 U.S. 528, 538 n.10 (1972)).

The District Attorney contends that the Attorney General is not representing his interest in this case because the Attorney General is not adequately representing the State’s interest. According to the District Attorney, the Attorney General’s representation of the State’s interest is inadequate because the Attorney General “aligned himself with Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit and joined Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit in urging the district court to vacate Saldano’s sentence” and because the Attorney General did not appeal the district court’s order granting habeas relief to Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit.

As the District Attorney has conceded, however, the Attorney General has discretion to confess error and to waive procedural default. See, e.g. , Alba v. Johnson , No. 00-40194 (5th Cir. Aug. 21, 2000) (unpublished opinion) (accepting the Texas Attorney General’s confession of error); 10 Brown v. State , 95 Tex. Crim. 664, 664, 255 S.W. 750, 751 (1923) (accepting the Attorney General’s confession of error); cf. McGee v. Estelle , 722 F.2d 1206, 1212 (5th Cir. 1984) (“As the chief legal officer of the state, the attorney general is the appropriate person to assert, or to waive” habeas exhaustion requirements.). The Attorney General is not an inadequate representative simply because he has taken these actions, especially when state law gives him the authority to do so.

It is true that, in exercising his discretion to confess error and to waive procedural default, “ the Attorney General cannot bind state officials, his clients, to his own policy preferences.” Clements , 999 F.2d at 840. There is no indication, however, that the Attorney General is acting contrary to the will of the State or his client, Director Dretke. Indeed, there is evidence that the Attorney General’s confession of error and waiver of procedural default furthers the State’s goal of ensuring that capital sentencing is untainted by racial prejudice, as manifested by recently enacted state legislation. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 37.07, § 3(a)(2) (Vernon Supp. 2004) (“[E]vidence may not be offered by the state to establish that the race or ethnicity of the defendant makes it likely that the defendant will engage in future criminal conduct.”).

Moreover, the Attorney General’s failure to appeal does not make him an inadequate representative of the State’s interest. In Baker , we stated that,

In this case where the district court has rejected binding Supreme Court authority, the circuit court is entitled to conclude as a matter of law that those interests were inadequately represented by those who failed to pursue the appeal and that the state officer seeking to intervene was a proper party to do so.

769 F.2d at 292. According to the District Attorney, Baker stands for the proposition that a party’s failure to appeal an adverse judgment renders the party an inadequate representative of the potential intervenor’s interest. Crucial to our holding in Baker , however, was not simply that the Attorney General chose not to appeal, but that the Attorney General failed to appeal where, as the en banc court saw it, “binding Supreme Court authority” indicated that the statute was not, in fact, unconstitutional. Id. While we need not decide whether the Attorney General’s confession of error was correct--indeed, as we explain below, we do not have jurisdiction to decide this question--we can conclude that the district court, by accepting the Attorney General’s confession of error, did not ignore binding Supreme Court authority. Cf. McCleskey v. Kemp , 481 U.S. 279, 309 n.30 (1987) (“The Constitution prohibits racially biased prosecutorial arguments.”); Baldwin v. Alabama , 472 U.S. 372, 382 (1985) (“[A] death sentence based upon consideration of ‘factors that are constitutionally impermissible or totally irrelevant to the sentencing process, such as for example the race . . . of the defendant,’ would violate the Constitution.” (dictum) (quoting Zant v. Stephens , 462 U.S. 862, 885 (1983))). Similarly, without deciding whether the district court was correct in accepting the State’s waiver of procedural default and waiver of harmless error, we hold that the district court did not ignore Supreme Court authority in so doing. 11 Cf. Trest v. Cain , 522 U.S. 87, 89 (1997) (“[P]rocedural default is normally a ‘defense’ that the State is ‘obligated to raise’ and ‘preserv[e]’ if it is not to ‘lose the right to assert the defense thereafter.’” (second alteration in original) (quoting Gray v. Netherland , 518 U.S. 152, 166 (1996))); 2 Randy Hertz & James S. Liebman, Federal Habeas Corpus Practice & Procedure § 31.2a (4th ed. 2001) (“[T]he ‘harmless error’ obstacle does not arise unless the state asserts it; the state’s failure to do so in a timely and unequivocal fashion waives the defense.”). Consequently, there is no reason to conclude that the Attorney General’s decision not to appeal makes him an inadequate representative of the State’s interest.

Finally, the District Attorney contends that the Attorney General inadequately represents his interest because the Attorney General’s position in this case is directly contrary to the position taken by the District Attorney. In Ex Parte Taylor , the Court of Criminal Appeals rejected a very similar argument:

The district attorney argues finally that he and the State Prosecuting Attorney should be allowed to file separate petitions because they have different interests: he wants to win only one case, while the State Prosecuting Attorney has to look out for all the cases of all the prosecutors of the state. We emphatically disagree. The State of Texas has only one, indivisible interest in a criminal prosecution: to see that justice is done.

36 S.W.3d at 887 (footnote omitted). In other words, even though the Attorney General and the District Attorney might choose to vindicate the State’s interest in different ways, the fact remains that the Attorney General and the District Attorney share an identical interest in this case: to see that justice is done. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 2.01 (Vernon Supp. 2004) (“[T]he primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys [is] not to convict, but to see that justice is done.”). In confessing error and waiving Saldano’s procedural default, the Attorney General has taken the position that justice in this case requires that Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit be resentenced. This choice is not unreasonable under the circumstances. Simply because the District Attorney would have made a different decision does not mean that the Attorney General is inadequately representing the State’s interest--and hence, the District Attorney’s claimed interest-- especially since state law specifically gives the Attorney General the discretion to make these kinds of decisions. 12

Because we conclude that the District Attorney does not have a “direct, substantial, and legally protectable interest” in these proceedings, and that any interest he does have is adequately represented by the Attorney General, we hold that the district court properly denied his application for intervention under Rule 24(a)(2). See Espy , 18 F.3d at 1205 (“If a party seeking to intervene fails to meet any one of [Rule 24(a)(2)’s] requirements, it cannot intervene as a matter of right.”).

III. GRANT OF HABEAS RELIEF

In light of our ruling on intervention, we do not have jurisdiction to address the remaining issues raised by the District Attorney in his appellate brief. See Marino v. Ortiz , 484 U.S. 301, 304 (1988) (“The rule that only parties to a lawsuit, or those that properly become parties, may appeal an adverse judgment, is well settled.”); Edwards , 78 F.3d at 993 (“[B]ecause [the applicants] were denied leave to intervene, and thus never obtained the status of party litigants in this suit, we dismiss their appeals, insofar as they seek review of the district court’s final judgment [on the merits].”).

IV. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the district court’s order denying the District Attorney’s application to intervene in this case and DISMISS the District Attorney’s appeal of the district court’s

1 The District Attorney sought leave to file a brief with the Supreme Court defending the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals, but the Supreme Court denied this request.

2 Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit , four other state inmates, each of whom had been sentenced to death as a result of punishment-phase hearings in which Dr. Quijano gave substantially similar testimony, petitioned for federal writs of habeas corpus. The Attorney General confessed error in each case and, in each, the federal court vacated the death sentence and granted a new sentencing hearing. See Alba v. Johnson , No. 00- 40194 (5th Cir. Aug. 21, 2000) (unpublished opinion); Broxton v. Johnson , No. H-00-CV-1034 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 2001) (unpublished opinion); Blue v. Johnson , No. H-99-0350 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 2, 2000) (unpublished opinion); Garcia v. Johnson , No. 99-CV-00134 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 7, 2000) (unpublished opinion).

3 The State Prosecuting Attorney has primary authority for representing the State before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, but a district attorney may assist the State Prosecuting Attorney. Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit v. State , 70 S.W.3d 873, 876-77 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (en banc) (citing Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 42.001(a) for the authority of the State Prosecuting Attorney); Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 42.005(b). Article 2.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure outlines the scope of authority of a district attorney.

4 The district court did, however, allow the District Attorney to file a brief as an amicus curiae.

5 A different standard of review applies to the district court’s decision regarding the timeliness of the potential intervenor’s application, see Espy , 18 F.3d at 1205 n.2, but timeliness is not at issue here, since all parties agree that the District Attorney’s application was timely.

6 Art. 2.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides:

Each district attorney shall represent the State in all criminal cases in the district courts of his district and in appeals therefrom, except in cases where he has been, before his election, employed adversely. When any criminal proceeding is had before an examining court in his district or before a judge upon habeas corpus, and he is notified of the same, and is at the time within his district, he shall represent the State therein, unless prevented by other official duties. It shall be the primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys, including any special prosecutors, not to convict, but to see that justice is done. They shall not suppress facts or secrete witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused.

7 Because, however, the District Attorney must still “represent the State in all criminal cases in the district courts of his district and in appeals therefrom,” Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 2.01, he is “bound” to make a decision on how to proceed in the light of intervening decisions. Naturally, in exercising that authority and carrying out that responsibility, he is obligated, as an attorney and officer of the court, to heed governing caselaw.

8 Although the District Attorney may no longer elicit testimony regarding the correlation between race and future dangerousness, the district court’s order has not impaired his job function because, under Texas law, district attorneys are not permitted to present such testimony in any case. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 37.07, § 3(a)(2) (Vernon Supp. 2004) (“[E]vidence may not be offered by the state to establish that the race or ethnicity of the defendant makes it likely that the defendant will engage in future criminal conduct.”).

9 We also note that we have never applied Baker in the context of habeas corpus, and we see no reason to do so here.

10 Alba involved almost identical facts--indeed, even the same expert witness--as this case.

11 As the District Attorney points out, Coleman v. Thompson held that federal habeas review is barred--absent a showing of cause and prejudice, or a fundamental miscarriage of justice--when a state prisoner has defaulted his federal claim pursuant to an adequate and independent state bar, such as Texas’s contemporaneous objection rule. 501 U.S. 722, 750 (1991). The district court did not violate the rule announced in Coleman , however, when it granted habeas relief to Previous HitSaldanoNext Hit. Coleman does not prevent a State from waiving a procedural bar in the first place. See Trest v. Cain , 522 U.S. 87, 89 (1997) (holding that procedural default is a defense that the State must raise).

12 The District Attorney also suggests that Attorney General is inadequately representing the State’s interest by failing to defend the Court of Criminal Appeals’s decision in Previous HitSaldanoNext HitNext Document v. State , 70 S.W.3d at 876-78. The Court of Criminal Appeals, however, does not alone express the will of the State; before our court, the Attorney General is the proper official to speak for the State. As we stated in McGee , “[d]eference is due the states, as governmental units, not their courts, their executives, or their legislatures, save as these bodies represent the state itself.” 722 F.2d at 1212.

Back to top

First hit Next document Previous document Native WordPerfect View image Back to results New search

Copyright © 2001 Odyssey Development. All rights reserved. Home.

Parents=Love~ No 0ne Loves like the z Parent.....

2007-05-22T01:30:00.000-07:00

An Honor Student flunked the TAKS~ i bet the politicians in Austin cant pass it either unless they cheat!

2007-05-17T23:34:00.001-07:00

Mossad Manufactures Mayhem @Maine MontMengele

2007-05-12T04:22:00.000-07:00

These are college seniors. Among the institutions whose students were surveyed: Dartmouth, Yale, Harvard, thMossade University of California at Berkeley, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Michigan.

It should go without saying that in a republic, civic education is a fundamental necessity. If even our elite college graduates have no idea what the First Amendment does, the country is in trouble.

On this page we list a variety of links to websites we hope you'll not only find interesting, but also useful. We present them here for informational purposes. Additional links will be added as the year progresses, so drop in regularly. Clicking on the links will display a new window, that may be closed to return to our website.

*
Academic Booster Club - Website of the Richard King High School Academic Booster Club.

* Advanced Placement - At the College Board website AP Course Descriptions may be read online or downloaded. The guides are useful in preparation for the AP examinations.

*
Common Application Online - Numerous colleges and universities are members of this electronic application filing system. Look over the listing of higher education institutions.

* FastWeb - " In 1995, an idea was born: use the Internet to help students find scholarships for college. Match each student's background, automatically, with eligibility requirements for scholarships from around the country and advise them about scholarship opportunities tailored to them. All for free."

* Life After High School - "Life After High School," a Texas Scholars Program interactive guide, is worth visiting. Have you wondered what you'll do after high school? Do you want to match a career with your interests? How much money will it take to live the lifestyle you're aiming for? Here's some help in finding answers to these and other questions about your future.

* Occupational Ourlook Handbook - Students face many decisions during their high school years, and one of the most important areas is that of preparing for careers. A nationally recognized source of career information is the Occupational Outlook Handbook. It is produced by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Copies of this publication are available in our Career Center; however, at this time we direct your attention to the online version for 2004-2005. You can search for hundreds of career descriptions, along with a wealth of information and work outlook.

* MyMajors.com - Here's a FREE online academic advising program you can try out that will help you identify a major, see what other majors might be of interest, and perhaps confirm a major you have already decided on. Are you interested? Get online for about 15 minutes and obtain some insight on where your interests are for a college major. This website is not just for Seniors, all students need to be aware of their career interests.

* PTA Newsletter - The last Richard King High School PTA Newsletter, The Mustang Express, may be viewed in PDF files by clicking the page numbers below.

1

2

3

4

* SAT Prep - Often students ask about ideas on preparing for the SAT. While we do not endorse any particular commercial products or companies, there are a variety of materials and services available. However, remember that a free preparation guide is available in the Counselors Office. You may want to check out an online service at a website called BoostMyScore.com, where you'll find a wealth of materials and services on a broad range of tests, some inexpensive while others cost several hundred dollars. The basic SAT Prep online course is on special.

* Student Newsletters - One of the most
useful websites for students, parents, and counselors is sponsored by The College Board (those SAT guys). Each month this company publishes online student newsletters, for freshmen/sophomores, juniors, and seniors. These newsletters contain advice and tips for students as they progress toward a post high school education. Below you'll see links to the specific newsletters. Students may also log on, sign up, and receive these newsletters via e-mail as they go online. For you convenience, we've placed hyper-links below that you can click to view each newsletter.

Freshman & Sophomore Newsletter

Junior Newsletter

Senior Newsletter

* TAKS Help Online - The University of Texas, with the support of sponsors, has launched a website that is not only flashy, but also highly engaging. The website has a diagnostic test and individually paced lessons that will assist students in preparing for the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills examination (TAKS), that is the new exit level examination required for graduation. Students initially need to set up a user name and password. Also, it appears that a broadband ISP is needed, due to the high quality of animation and interaction. The system is called "Track," and hosted by "Blackboard." The Track program is highly acclaimed and well worth using. One key feature of the program is that students can focus on areas of academic weaknesses. With the many academic areas that the TAKS assesses, this online preparation website may prove to be of value to many students.

*
Texas Common Application - An electronic means of applying to Texas colleges and universities.

* Web U.S Community Colleges - This page of UT Austin Web Central lists all regionally-accredited community colleges in the U.S. and provides links to those with a Web presence. (Please note: this list includes 2-year institutions and 2-year branch campuses of 4-year institutions, but not 4-year institutions offering associate degrees.)

Who is wasting CCIsd Students time and Money????

2007-05-12T03:01:00.000-07:00