Case Information
*1
IN THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEAT'S HOUSTON, TEXAS
LOYD LANDON SORROW Appollant
HARRIS COUNTV, atal Appellee
On Appal from the 412th Distaid Couat Braforia County, Texas, Cause No. 74003-I
Supplementation on a New Matter and Reply Brief
Loyd Landon Sorrow 1134905 C.T.Terrell unit - IBout 1300 F.M. 655 Roshacon, Texas 77593
*2
IDENTITY OF PARTIES ANDCOWNSEL
Plaintife - Appellant Loydlandon sORROW 1134905 C.T. TERREll Unit - 1800 t 1300 EM 655 Rosharen, Texas 77503 Pro Se Defendant-Appellees
- Harris County, et al;
- Harris County Sherifc Department, Sherif etal, indwishal and oficial capacities;
- HarRis County shersifes Depdrtments Mentol Health Divishan etal;
- HarRis County Sherifes Deparments Medical Division: Dr.Senl etal;
- Harris County District Prasecuting Athorney, individual and of- ficial capacities, etal. Vince Ryan HARRIS County Athorney Of Counsel at Trial andon Appetal B. Jorky HERSCHER
Assistant County Athorney Trial Counsel for Defendant-Appellees Keith A.Toler Assitant County Athorney Appellate Counsel Eor Appellees HARRIS County Athorney's ofeice 1019 Congresi, 15 th Floor Hovstion, TY. 77583
*3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Identify of Parties and Council. ..... ii. Table of Contents. ..... iii. Index of Authorities. ..... iii,iv,v,vi. Statement Regarding Transcript Records. ..... vi. Statement Regarding Oral Argument. ..... vi. Statement of the Case. ..... vi. Statement of Facts. ..... vi,vii. New Matter. ..... vii, 2,3,4,5,6. New Supreme Court Case, Reply. ..... vii,6,7,8. Argument. ..... 2-9. Prayers. ..... 10. Unsworn Declaration. ..... 10. Service. ..... 10. Attachments Read. INDEX OF AUTORITIES Cases PAGE Alamo Work Force Development, Inc. v. Van 21 S.W.3d. 425. ..... 6. Begs v. Texas Dept. of M.H.M.R.A. 496 S.W.2d. 252 (Tev. C.iv. App.-San Antonio 1973). ..... 8.
*4
CASES
INDEX.OF.AUTHORITIES PAGE
Black v. Johnson, 82 S.W.3d. 44 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2002, nopet). . . . . . . 9.
City of Dallas v. Heard, 252 S.W.3d. 95 (App. 5 Dist. 2008 Revieu denied, Rehearing pet. for Reviem denied). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.
County of Cameron v. Brown, 80 S.W.3d. 549 (Tex.2002). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.
Gregor Houston Transportation Co.v. Phillips, 801 S.W.2d. 523 (Tex. 1990). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.
Hellena Chemical Co. v. wilkin, 47 S.W.3d. 486 (Sup. 3001). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.
Jansen v. Fitzpatrick, 14 S.W.3d. 426 (Tex.App.-Houston CHmdist], 2000 No pet.). 4.
Loyd v. Eco Resources InC., 956 S.W.2d. 110 (Tex.App.-Houston [140 Dist. 1 1987). . . . 5.
Mossler v. Shields, 818 S.W.2d. 752 (Tex. 1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.
State v. Benevides, 772 S.W.2d. 271 (Tex.App.-Corpus Chaiti; 1989 wait denied). . . 9. Standard Save and Loonv.Miller 114 S.W.2d. . . . . . . . . . 9. Texas Dept. of M.H.M.R.A. v. Petty, 817 S.W.2d. 707 (wait granted, attend, 848 ad. 690 waitoweated). 7.
Federal Case Heck v. Murphy, 977 F.2d 355. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*5 Supreme Count Case
YATES v. UNITED STATES 574 U.S. — (2015). .6,8.
Statutes
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, 98101.001 (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9). 98101.021 (1). 98101.021 (2). .6,7. 98101.056. .2. 98101.056 (2). .5,6.
Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Act. 2.03. .6. Act. 16.22 (2). .1,6. Act. 46 B. .2,6.
Texas Government Code Sec. 311.016 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7). .3.
Texas Health and Safety Code Sec. 9571.003. .2. Sec. 9611.005 (2), (5), (6), (7). .2,4. Sec. 9611.006 (2), (4), (5), (7), (8), (11). .2,6. Sec. 9611.006 (2).
*6 Texas Health and Safety Code, Sec. 8.611.045 (a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(f),(g),(h),(i),(j),(k) . . . . . . 2,6.
Texas Penal Code, Sec. 8.03 (a). 9. Sec. 22.021 (a),(b),(c),(d),(e) . 9.
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule #590.
STATEMENT REGARDING TRANSCRIPT RECORDS
ON RECORD please find the Habeas Corpus Petitions in the cause of #874978, which is the only remaining medical and Mental Health Records available for review and referred to by page numbers.
STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT
ORAL ARGUMENT Requested, personal, and verbal explanations, on mental health issues, and for record.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals the 'district court's order granting Summary judgment to Harris County etal, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
This civil action stems from Harris County's failure to provide statutory provided safe gourds in vio vi.
*7
lation to my Due Process Rights, and Cravel and Unusual punishment provisions of United States Constitution, while under their guardianship as a pre-trial detainee, and aftercare upon release, being an out of state citizen.
NEWMATTER
The appellant has recognized a. new matter in controversie of the issue of a waiver of immunity, depriving the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
The new matter is found in the Texas Civil Peac-tice and Remedies Code&; 101.056 this statute applies to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure \16.22(a), and Texas Health and Safety Code (7).
NEW SUPREME COURT CASE
Appellant has only now been able to review the New Supreme Court case Vates v. U.S. 574 U.S. (2015).
Appellant believes this case could be used when considering the statutes that give this case a cause of action, by their congressional intent.
*8
No. 14-15-00571-CV
INTHEFOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS
LOYD LANDON, SORROW Appellant
V.
HARRIS COUNTY, etal Appellee
On Appal From the 412th Disfaict Coust Brazoria County, Texas, Cause No. 79003-2
Supplementation on a New Matter and Reply Bate
To the Honorable Justices of the Fourteenth Coust of Appeals; Appellant respect fully supplemensth is original Briee on Appal, in accordance to Texas Rules of Appallete Precedure 38.6 (E) and 38.7 and Texas Rules of Civil Procedure- 590 , because a new supreme count case was only now available for Reveiw, and has brought about a New matter, at which appellant eagrest a denial of Summary Judgment and Remand for Trial.
*9 NEW MATTER
In accordance to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, 590 I would like to bring forward a new matter concerning the subject matter, jurist's diction of the Trial Court's ability to entertain this suit under the Texas Health. & Safety Code 611.045 (a) — (b), (Harris County Refused to release a complete Medical and Mental Health Records between 2001-2011, at which they destroyed, (year early than prescribed by their own policies), and 611.005 (a), (b) and (c), (which are Special Legal Remedies for Improper Disclosure of Failure to Disclose Confidential Records), and 611.006 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i), (which provides the Ministerial Duty to the Sheriffs Dept. found in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Act. 16.22 and 46.8, these are Mandatory Laws).
The New Matter is Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 101.056 which plainly states—Descentiandry Powers—This chapter does not apply to a claim based on; (f) the failure of a governmental unit to perform an act that the Unit is not required, by law to perform, or a governmental units decision on the performance or non-performance of an act if the law leaves performance or non-performance of the act to the discretion of the governmental unit.
The Non-performance of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 16.22 and 46.8 violate Texas Health & Safety Code 6611.00 (Any criminal proceedings, as other wise provided by law), and 16.22 is plain when it says Not Later Than 72 hours after receiving evidence or a statement that may establish reasonable cause to believe that the defendant committed to the sheriffs custody has a mental illness, the sheriff shall notify a magistrate of that fact.
A defendant's behavior or the result of a prior 2.
*10 evaluation indicating a need for referral for further mental health assessments. Must be considered indeterming whether reasonable cause exists to believe the defendant has a mental illness. On a determination that there is reasonable cause to believe that the defendant has a mental illness, the magistrate shall order an examination, of the defendant by the local mental health authority or another disinterested expert experienced and qualified in mental health to determine whether the defendant has a mental illness as defined by Section 571.003. Health and Safety Code.
Legislature gave definition to mandatory language. See, Texas Government Code 8311.016 "May, shall, Must", etc. - The following constructions apply unless the context in which the word or phrase appears necessarily requires a different construction, or unless different constructions is exspressly provided by statutes. (1)."May" creates dictionary authority or grant's permission or power. (2)."Shall" imposes a duty. (3). "Most" creates or recognizes a condition precedent. (4). Is entitled to "creates or recognizes a right. (5)."MayNot" imposes a prohibition and is synonymous with. Shall Not". (6). Is not entitled to" negates a right (7)."Is not required to" negates a duty or condition precedent. See, Helena Chemical Co., Wilkinn (Sup. 200) 47 Sw.3d. 496 says, "Wond" "Must" in a statute is given a mandatory meaning when followed by a non-compliance penalty.
Inow request this Court of Appeals to review pages provided by Harris County Attorney Office of the appellant. Habeas corpus Records in the cause of . These Habeas petitions have the appellants only surviving Medical and Mental Health Records due to Harris County's premature destruction or spoilation of evidence for this civilization. See, Transcript pages 440 and
*11
143 (Please note the title and ownership of this document, and the Dates, also the written statements recording a mental illness, and the medication/anti-psychic drug used for major depression), see, 145 and 146 (dated May 3, 2002. Referred to Mental Health and Mental Retardation Authorities, see; Elavil-Irritability and on 146- dated Sept. 5, 2002, recording episodic lightheadedness, memory lapses, and, to any and visual hallucinations, and again referred to Mental Health Authorities.) also see. 177 (This is dated on April 19, 2001, it shows Ian a out of state pretrial/abstainee from West Virginia, which is required to file this law suit under the Texas Health 9 Safety Code 6611.005 (a)). (Please know these medical records are on Record in this case).
On page 143, Harris County Sheriffs Office Medical Division - Health Assessment - M 023 (12/00) Form, dated May 15, 2001, Medical History and Review of Systems - #5 Mental Problems (Institutional Case) yes No - S. 1996. depression/alcohol.
On page 40, (Some Harris County Document) dated September 06, 2002 and again on 45 records Mental Problems yes No , 5. 1990's depression/anxiety.
For one year or so, medical and mental health, documental information, information was withheld, omitted or negligently misused, misapplied, inadvertently or on purpose from the magistrate as was prescribed by law.
Later this same documental mental health and medical information, was were submitted to me by many request however and but incomplete. (Please see Letter attached at reor from Ms Daria Price).
ARGUMENT
Since Harris County Sheriffs Dept. falls within the definition and boundaries of Texas Civil Peas-
*12 tice and Remedies Code $8 101.001 (2) "Employee"; means a person, including an officer or agent in paid service of a governmental unit by competent authority, but does not include an independent contractor, an agent or employee of a independent contractor or person who perform tasks the details of which a governmental unit does not have a legal right to control. (3)."Governmental Unit" means (A) this state and all the several agencies of government that collectively constitute the government of this state, including other agencies bearing different designations and all departments, burReans, boards, commissions, offices, agencies, councils, and courts. (B) a political subdivision of this state, including any city, county, school district, irrigation district (etc, etc), (c) emergency service organization. (D) any other institution, agency or organ of government the status and authority of which are derived from the Constitution of Texas or from laws passed by legislature under the Constitution. (5) "Scope of Employment" means an agency, board commission, department or office, other than a district created by Art. XVI sec. 59 of the Texas Constitution, or a statute of this state.) they have and had a ministerial duty" to abide by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure 16.22 (a), during the formertioned one year (plus), of many suggestions, documental recordings, examinations, mental health and mental retardation referrals by their own Dr. Seal. Id. 16.32 is clear when it says "Not later than 72 hours"
The existence of a Legal duty is a question of law to be decided, and if a constitution instruction has occurred, see; Greater Houston. Transportation. Co.v. Phillips 901 S.W.2d. 523,525 (Tex 1990).
I would like to introduce Loyd v. Eco Resources, Inc. 956 S.W.2d 110 at 124 (19-24)-Sovereign Immunity is not waived under Texas Torts claims Act for discretionary acts, Texas Civil practice and Remedies
*13 Code 6101.056 (a) (versou 1997). Since Harris County failed to provide the mandatory protection statute of Id. 16.22, and 16.22 is very distinct in its language, and leaves no discretion for the actor to consider, Harris County is not immune from this civil action, because it was the proximate cause of my injuries, and the employee worked outside of the law. see, Alamo Workforce Development, Inc v. Van 21 s.m., 3d. 428 at 434-35
Harris County is not immune and Brazoria County District Court has subject water jurisdiction, and the appellants Due Process Rights have been violated for a neglect of a mandatory duty, which is a crime in this state. see, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 2.03.
APPELLANTS REPLY TO APPELLEES BRIEF
The Supreme Courts new decision in Yates v. United States 574 U.S. — (2015), is relevant to the issues at hand.
Are Harris County Sheriffs Medical and Mental Health Assessment Documents "tools of trade" within the definition of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 6101.021 (2), when applied to Texas Health and Safety Codes 6611.045 (4), (N) and 6611.005 (4), (N), (C) and 6611.006 (4), (N), (T), (D), for a violation of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 16.22 (a) and 46.8. "Tangible Object v. Tangible Property".
ARGUMENT
The statutes above all pertains to Documents, Records, Information, Examinations, Reports, these are Tools used for many different statutory purposes, and like in Yates, it is a are not included as Tangible Property, or object within the mean-
*14 ing of 1374, because 101.021 (1) speaks of motor-driven vehicles or equipment and so it would be safe to say 48 S Sw.2d. 680 Reb. overruled.
Petty Received Wrong Readings of evaluations where I Received the neglect to use the evaluations, that trigger safeguards to protect lives.
Ask Harris County to produce the document that should have been filed to the magistrate pursuant to $16.22(a) or, the mental health evaluations that were ordered by Dr. Seal, see Transcript pages 145 and 146.
Harris County failed to use the in statutory provided tools of trade without regard to Texas Law, which caused the appellant to be shaved out of the County Tail without any medications, ofbacare or regard to his safety, being placed in a Homeless shelter, not returned to his home in West Virginia, waking up the following day face blistered, puss pockets inside of nose behind his ears, eyes swollen, dehydrated, and hungry, from sleeping on the concrete outside of the star of Hope Mission because there was no room. They failed to use statutory safeguards to protect my life, they could have just theown me to Hungary wolves.
It is decided in City of Dallas v. Heard (App. 5. Dist. 2008) 252 Sw 3d. 98 Review denied, Rehearing of pet. For review denied that safety features required by law allows a suit to be filed, 'for civil actions', could
*15 not it also be applied to 'statutory safety creatures placed by legislature to protect wards of the Harris County Sheriffs Dept. who suffer mental illnesses?
In Yates it insists that if traditional tools of statutory construction leaves any doubt of the meaning of "tangible object" or "tangible property" in this case, then it is appropriate to invoke the Ruleof, lenity see, Pp. 18-19 of Yates, only instead of criminal liability the same standards should also apply to civil liability.
Harris County concealed the facts that they were gaurdians of a pre-trial detainee suffering severe mental depression, and using powerful anti-psychotic and narcotic medications to treat their ward.
Texas Penal Code 823.02 (a)(a)(a)(v) says; if the person administers or provides flunitrazepam otherwise know as rohipnol, gamma hydrosy butyrate, or ketamine to the victim of the offense with intent of facilitating the commission of a offence; (c) disabled individual. What is the difference between this and Drug Induced Judicial Rape?
Whether the neglect of use and misuse of statutory documents tools of trade, or the use of drugs in Judicial proceedings takes place both are criminal in nature. See, Texas Penal Code 8.03 (a) Mistakeof Law.
In Begs v. Texas Dept. of M.H.M.R.A. 496 S42d 252,254 (Tex.Civ. App.-San Antonio 1973) the word 'USE' means to put or bring into action or service,' to employ for or apply to a given purpose, which Harris County neglected to do in violation of the law.
When appellate Courts consider pleas to the justification, it must construe the pleadings in the favor of the plaintiffs, and look to the pleades intent. see, County of Cameron, Brown 80 S42d.549 , 555 (Tex. 2002).
*16
HECK
I would like to bring to the attention of the court of appeals that the Heck Dactaine only applies to Federal 1983 Actions and to cases that challenge their convictions, IF THE PLATNTIFFS HAVE FAILED TO EXHAUST HIS STATE REMEDIES, which in this case cannot apply to this lawsuit, all state remedies have been properly exhausted. see; Heck v. Murahrey 997 F2d. 355.
VENUE
The appellant objected to the original change of venue, and change of venue occurred anyway.
If the Brazoria District Court does not have subject Matter Jurisdiction then waif therolid the Taxis County Court because the transfer gives the same status to the case as if it had been originally instituted in that court. see, Standand Save &;Loans Assn v. Miller 114 s.w2d. 1201, and so the the change is void, because Taxis County could not change the venue without Subject Matter Jurisdiction. see; State v. Beneva vide s 772 34v. 2d. 271 at 273 (Tex. App. Corpus Cheist; 1989 -waitcluued).
PREJUDICE
This case should not be dissmised WITH prejudice because if the Trial Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction it cannot render a judgment over the merits of the case. see; Black v. Jack sown 82 s.w3d. 44, 56 (Tex.App. -Tyler 2002 nopet); also In Jansen v. Fitzpatrick 14 sW 3 d .436 431 (TEx App.- Houston (14th DistJ 2000 nopot.), a. diss nissal with prejudice is a final decision on the merits. ID. Black and Fitzpatrick, also in Mosleav. Shields 818 S.W. 2 d. 752,754 (TEx. 1991)
*17 PRAVER
Appellant respectfully requests for a reversal of the Trial Courts Judgment, and demand for a jury trial, and or any other relief available.
Texas Roles of Appellate Peaceclues #43.
UNWORN DECLARATION
I hereby declare under penalty of purjury do swear that all Government and all attached are true, and true copies of evidential exhibits.
Loyd Landon Sorrow #1134905 C.T. Terrell Unit - JBast#16 1300 FM 655 Roshareon, Texas 77583
SERVICE
I Loyd Landon Sorrow Apollant hereby certify, that a True and Correct Copy has been sent to;
Keith A. Toled ON 12-24-15 Ayst. Atty. Hades County 1019 Congress, 1595 FL. Houston Texas 77002
*18 ADRIAN CARCIA Sheriff of Haris County 1200 Baker Street Houston, Texas 77002-1206 ww.ncts.net/ac
Loyd Iarion Sorrow - 11001134905 C.T. Ternell thit - Callf A2 - 40
1300 F.M. 655 Rusharom, Texas 77583
Regame to Letter dated 03/02/11 Mr. Sorrow, the medical records department received your letter on 3/23/11 re- questing a complete copy of your inmate medical records, you also stated in your letter "For over 9 1/2 years I have tried to retrieve copies of my medical and mental health care records ..." Mr. Sorrow, first and foremost, please accept my sincere apology for the diff- iculty you experinced in trying to obtain copies of your medical records here at the sheriff's office. I would also like to point out that the inmate medical records includes all mental and medical service treatments you received while here at the jail. My records indicate that we received a letter/request from you on 11/14/03 and the letter/request was sent back to you asking for more identifying informa- tion (SPM) in order to complete your request. On 12/18/03 we received a letter/ request from you requesting copies of your medical records and we mailed a total of 14 pages to you on 12/23/03. Again on 1/8/04 we received a letter/ request from you requesting copies of your medical records and we mailed a total of 35 pages to you on 1/14/04. We did not receive any requests from you in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, or 2010. After receiving your letter on 3/23/11 we contacting the Harris County Ar- hives Records Center and was notified on 3/30/11 that your medical records were destroyed on 9/14/10 in accordance to state and federal guidelines.
Sincerelyt D. avie Price, AHiA
Medical Records Manager Harris County Sheriffs Office
I, Loyd London Sorrow, Do declare, under penalty of perjury, that this is true and correct textual copy of the original letter I received form the Harris County Sheriffs Office.
Erecuted this 24 day of December, 2015
*19 Dear Clerk of Court, Please find and present this my Suppliment and Reply Brief as soon as possible to the Honorable Justices of this 14th County Apprais.
"Sincerely" Thanks!
Loyd L. Sorrow, 1134905 C.T. Teacell Unit-18011/6 300 Fm 655 Boscharm, Texas
CERIe lot 3
*20