How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Law Educator, Esq. Your Own Question
Law Educator, Esq.
Law Educator, Esq., Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 117369
Experience:  Attorney with over 20 years law enforcement, prosecution, civil rights and defense experience
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Law Educator, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Texas Penal Code 37.9 goes toward obstruction of justice. U.S.

This answer was rated:

Texas Penal Code 37.9 goes toward obstruction of justice.
U.S. Constitutional Code 1505 outlaws obstruction of justice.
Q: Where do you find the governing statutes and passages in Texas Constitutional Law that pertain to O/o/J.
If intentional haven't civil rights been violated?
Civil rights violations are under 42 USC 1983, you already have the Texas code that was violated and that is the basis for your claim under 1983 for violation of your civil rights, IF a government actor was the one who committed the obstruction of justice. If your claim is against a court or a DA in performance of their duty, then your claim would be barred as they have judicial and prosecutorial immunity.

I hope you found my answer helpful, please click on the GREEN ACCEPT button above for my answer (EVEN IF YOU ARE A SUBSCRIPTION MEMBER). This is necessary for me to be paid for my work and so that I can get credit for assisting you. Your question will not close, and you will still have the opportunity to follow-up if needed. Leaving a bonus and positive feedback is not required, but doing so is certainly appreciated!

Please remember this is a dialog if you have follow up questions please use the REPLY button and ask. If you have additional questions, please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. Please consider that I am answering the question or question that is posed in your posting based upon my reading of your post and sometimes misunderstandings can occur. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered.

Also remember, sometimes the law does not support what we want it to support, but that is not the fault of the person answering the question, so please be courteous.

There can also be a delay of an hour or more in between my answers because I may be helping other customers or taking a break.


You can always request me through my profile at or beginning your question with “For PaulMJD…”

YOU CAN ALSO GO TO and request me.

Customer: replied 6 years ago.

Is there any language or passages in the Texas Constitution against O/o/J. If so where?

No it is not in the Texas Constitution because it is an area occupied by the Federal Law.
Law Educator, Esq. and other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 6 years ago.

I’m focusing on my federal civil complaints for obstruction of justice solely by briefly stating that due to the O/o/J activity it resulted in an erroneous ruling and a favorable outcome for the defendant’s .Since the O/o/J activity took place during proceeding by the defendant’s with both their counselors knowledge and involvement then the underlying case will be preserved..



Jurisdiction is proper in this Court because the complaints took place during court proceeding in Dallas County, Texas. The amount in controversy is secondary in scope to the main complaint of Tex P. C. § 37.09. The court has jurisdiction over Defendants because these defendants conduct business in the State of Texas and cause of action arises out of defendant’ acts and omissions in the State of Texas.


This cause of action has its head buried in a civil lawsuit Cause No. xx-xxxxx conducted in The XYZ District Court of Dallas County, Texas. During court proceeding in the underlying case violation of TEX. P. C. § 37.09 (a)(1)(2) and 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c)(2) took place.

Does this seem sufiscient enough??

If this is being filed in federal court then why are you talking about state laws? You would file this based on just the federal laws and jurisdiction would be not because they violated state laws, but they violated federal laws depriving you of your rights to a fair trial when they committed the obstruction of justice. You need to stop mixing the state and federal issues together. Also, you really should consider not playing in federal court without an attorney because the federal court plays by very strict rules and does not give pro se parties any breaks at all.
Customer: replied 6 years ago.

Venue for this action is proper in Dallas County, Texas because the obstruction of justice made the basis of this cause of action is situated in Dallas County, Texas.18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c)(2)


This cause of action has its head buried in a civil lawsuit Cause No. xx-xxxxx conducted in The XYZ District Court of Dallas County, Texas. During court proceeding in the underlying case violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c)(2) took place. Defendant’s obstruction of justice infringed on Plaintiff civil rights under 42 USC 1983 in depriving Plaintiff his rights to a fair trial.

So as asked, the underlying case is preserved??

As for being a pro se' litigant I've already have learned that there is allowance given fro the courts. In todays economic durnturn attorneys are very selective in the cases they pick up on contengentcy. My case just entered its 7th year. Attorney don't want to spend the time or effort to go through seven years of proceeding that they had no control of!!
I can only tell you the O/o/J is so blaintant and that their are numerios counts of it. I would hope the opposing counselors do not wish the Fed Court to learn of it.
In todays would over 30% of cases are filed by pro se' litigant.
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
Are trere any William Kunstler or XXXXX XXXXX left?
I understand your position, but if you are in federal court with this then you need to focus on the violations of your federal law violations, not the state law violations. Also, while you may think they give some help to pro se litigants, the courts have said over and over that pro se litigants will be held to the same standards as attorneys.
Law Educator, Esq. and other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
You misunderstood me. I know all to well the courts do not give pro se' litigants any extra understanding. I've already learned that one. But until a court or jury addresses my offer of proof evidence that resides in the trial courts record, then I must continue.

I did send you a tip. Did you get it?
Yes I did, thank you very much.
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
Hey Paul;

In my case one of the defendants filed a motion to dissmiss which doesn't not require a certificate of conference.

But before this defendant can file such a motion Texas N. Dis. local rules require a defendant that does not reside in the district to file a motion for leave to appear without local counsel, inwhich a conference is required. Correct?


Local Rule 83.10 (a) requires the appearance of local counsel where counsel of record for a party does not reside in this district. Accordingly, the Defendant’s should file the entry of appearance of local counsel satisfying the requirements of Local Rule 83.10 (a). Failure to do so would subject the Defendant’s to the entry of default judgment. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.10 (a) Defendant’s XXXXXXXXXX Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fid. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) should be denied.

A conference is not required, but a hearing is required. A hearing is before the judge in court, the conference is either between the parties or in the judge's chamber.
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
In other words, the Defendant should have held counsel with me to see if I was unopposed to their motion for leave of local counsel and provided the judge a unopposed
order to sign off on. They cannot just file for a dismissal. Accordingly, they first most file a motion before the court for leave of local counsel. Local Rule 83.10 (a) give them 21 days from the original petition to request for a motion for leave of counsel. You can't just mask for dismissal outright.

On top of that, the attorney representing the other defendant's declined both the summon wavers and court issued summons for the defendant's stating " his firm no longer represents these defendant's, and then it is he who files for the dismissal????
No, they do not have to counsel with you unless they are filing an unopposed or joint motion. If they are filing their own motion, then you have 14 days to file an objection to that motion under the rules of procedure. They cannot just file the motion for dismissal without getting their local counsel or asking for leave of local counsel, but this still does not mean they have to consult with you before they do it.
Law Educator, Esq. and other Criminal Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 6 years ago.
Okay, The court has already giving me a 30 day extention. This is the little one the other pending motion will be much harder. I'll be in need of case law that will go against the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Just for your info, there needs to be a web site that provides fast case law assistance.
You can view this answer by clicking here to Register or Login and paying $3.
If you've already paid for this answer, simply Login.

Customer: replied 6 years ago.
People will pay for it. Did you get the tip?
Yes I got the accept thank you.