in Re Jim Gawerc

In The

Court of Appeals

For the

First District of Texas

_________________

NO. 01-03-00809-CV

_________________





IN RE JIM GAWERC, Relator









Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus





MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Jim Gawerc, asserts that he is illegally restrained and petitions the Court to grant him habeas corpus relief. We deny the petition.

Background

On July 20, 2001, as the culmination of a suit to modify the parent-child relationship, the trial court signed an order that ordered relator to pay to real party in interest, Ingrid Philipson, retroactive child support of $750, payable in three installments of $200 per month and a final installment of $150. Additionally, the trial court ordered relator to post a $50,000 bond to secure his prompt payment of his child support obligation.

On February 3, 2003, the trial court heard a motion for enforcement brought by Philipson, and, by order signed February 18, 2003, found relator in contempt for not paying each installment of the retroactive child support as scheduled and for not posting the $50,000 bond. Additionally, the trial court found that attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $2,400 should be assessed against relator. The trial court assessed criminal, punitive contempt sentences of 180-days confinement for each of the four missed retroactive child support installments and for the failure to post the $50,000 bond. These five 180-day sentences were to run concurrently. The trial court also assessed civil, coercive contempt measures against relator for each of these acts of contempt, as well as to enforce the payment of the $2,400 attorney's fees and costs.

However, in the same February 18, 2003 contempt order, the trial court suspended relator's commitment, provided that by March 10, 2003, he (1) paid the $750 retroactive child support to Philipson, (2) posted the $50,000 bond as ordered in the July 20, 2001 trial court order, and (3) paid the $2,400 to Philipson's attorney.

On August 4, 2003, the trial court revoked the suspension of relator's commitment, finding that he had failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the February 18, 2003 order suspending commitment by not posting the $50,000 bond and not paying the $2,400 of attorney's fees and court costs. In Philipson's response to relator's petition, she stipulated that relator met the first condition of suspension of commitment of paying the $750 retroactive child support. The trial court committed relator to confinement of 180 days each, to be served concurrently, for not posting the bond and not paying the $2,400, and from day to day thereafter until the bond was posted and the $2,400 was paid.

Analysis

Relator asserts that the order to post a bond to secure child support contained in the July 20, 2001 modification order is void because the trial court was without authority to issue it. He contends that he is wrongfully incarcerated for not obeying this void provision. This, however, overlooks the fact that in the February 18, 2003 contempt order, the trial court not only held relator in contempt and sentenced him to 180-days confinement for not posting the bond, but also for not paying each of the four installments of retroactive child support. That relator later apparently paid the $750 to Philipson would not nullify the trial court's four 180-day sentences for those violations. See Cadle Co. v. Lobinger, 50 S.W.3d 662, 667 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2001, pet. denied) ("In criminal contempt proceedings, the court punishes the contemnor for improper past acts, and no subsequent voluntary compliance can enable the contemnor to avoid punishment."). Relator does not challenge the retroactive child support order of the modification order. Therefore, even if we were to hold the bond provision of the modification order to be void, it would not help relator because it is undisputed that he violated that part of the modification order ordering retroactive child support payments and that it is valid.

Conclusion

We deny relator's petition for habeas corpus relief and remand him to the custody of the Sheriff.





Sam Nuchia

Justice





Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Nuchia, and Higely.