Footnotes in HTML versions of opinions are designated by boxes (click on the box to see 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. 06-0088
════════════
In re The Honorable Karen Angelini
════════════════════════════════════════════════════
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Justice Johnson, joined by Justice O’Neill, concurring.
I agree that mandamus relief should be denied because factual disputes exist. Once that conclusion has been reached and expressed, however, no further controversy is before us as this matter is postured. I would not opine as to what relief is appropriate in the event of future hearings and if particular factual determinations result from those hearings.
Further, although I joined with Justice Wainwright in dissenting from the Court’s decisions in Francis and Holcomb and still believe that those cases were wrongly decided, the cases are now precedent of this Court. Thus, I cannot join his dissent. I concur in the Court’s decision to deny relief.
________________________________________
Phil Johnson
Justice
OPINION DELIVERED: February 24, 2006