# Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Saylors v. Texas > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386011_0830%3A1 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Petition for Writ of Certiorari - **Published:** January 1, 1992 - **Citation:** 506 U.S. 828 ## Text 91-2029 No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term, 1991 BENTON BRETT SAYLORS, Petitioner Vv. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Respondent Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh District of the State of Texas Martin L. Peterson 105 W. Washington St. Stephenville, Texas 76401 (817) 965-5050 Counsel for Petitioner QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether a criminal defendant in a state court, faced with the possibility of imprisonment, is presumptively deprived of due process (including effective assistance of counsel), in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, when tried before a judge who has not been required to demonstrate or prove the degree of his or her legal competence by any uniform, standardized testing procedure. Whether the current county court system in Texas invidiously denies one class of criminal defendants a substantial benefit available to another, similarly situated, class, in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. TABLE OF CONTENTS Questions Presented for Review ...............0.0eceees 1 Reports OF Praee GHOSE soins. ccivcedsecsiccsscnssmass 2 SOMO GE FUTTRGICUIOG 6 iii so oii cissedssdcitersedcnd 2 Constitutional Provisions Involved.................s008 2-3 PME i iis oe ita see 3-4 Reasons for Allowance of the Writ ..................55 5-9 CORNER 65S hse Bee 9 Cortnaete 00 GOGvOls as ccssciics teeta 10 ARBOR FR iii csivinsa viccccnsisacessessntasiaseesaet A-l ARGRUGE © dai igs tcissiasceene eee A-5 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Ex parte Craig, 150 Tex.Cr.R. 598, 193 S.W.2d 20. 3 Deeerereeperererte cc 8 we re 4 Ex parte Ross, 522 S.W.2d 214 (Tex.Cr.App. 1975) 5 Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S.Ct. yee em i, 26) eer eee 6 Gordon v. Justice Court of Sutter County, 12 Cal. 3d 323, 115 Cal.Rptr. 632, 525 P.2d 72 (1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 938, 95 S.Ct. 1148, 43 L.. 26.08 419 C1999) scccccccovisneenwe 5 Hankamer v. Templin, 143 Tex. 572, 187 S.W.2d DED (19GD) 0:0 TEX.REV.CIV.STAT.ANN. art. 6701h (Vernon Supp. 1992) defines this offense. A-2 (Vernon 1989) because the amended information charged appellant with a different offense (DWI) than that alleged in the original information which had been filed in the case (driving without proof of insurance).* The court overruled the objection. This was error. See Flowers v. State, 815 S.W.2d 724 at 728 (Tex.Cr.App.1991) (a "different offense" means a "different statutory offense.") The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that this type of error is not subject to the "harmless error" analysis of TEX.R.APP.P. 81(b)(2). See Sodipo v. State, 815 S.W.2d 551 at 554 (Tex.Cr.App.1990). The first point of error is sustained. Qualifications of County Judge In his second point of error, appellant urges that his rights were violated because the county judge was not a licensed attorney. The Texas Constitution requires county judges to "be well informed in the law of the State, " but it does not require them to be licensed attorneys. See TEX. CONST. art V, § 15. This does not violate appellant’s rights to the effective assistance of counsel, equal protection of the laws, due process, or due course of law. See Masquelette v. State, 579 S.W.2d 478 at 479 * Article 28.10(c) provides: An indictment or information may not be amended over the defendant’s objection as to form or substance if the amended indictment or information charges the defendant with an additional or different offense or if the substantial rights of the defendant are prejudiced. (Emphasis added) A-3 (Tex.Cr.App.), cert. den’d, 444 U.S. 986, 100 S.Ct. 515, 62 L.Ed.2d 416 (1979) ; Ex parte Ross, 522 S.W.2d 214 at 219 (Tex.Cr.App.), cert. den’d, 423 U.S. 1018, 96 S.Ct. 454, 46 L.Ed.2d. 390 (1975). Appellant’s second point of error is overruled. The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause is remanded. BOB DICKENSON JUSTICE January 9, 1992 Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 90. A-4 APPENDIX B SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS JUDICIAL EDUCATION EXECUTIVE COMMITEE Justice Eugene A. Cook, Chairman RULES OF JUDICIAL EDUCATION As Amended Through June 20,1990 RULE 1. AUTHORITY. Pursuant to the inherent and constitutional authority of the Supreme Court to administer the judicial affairs of the state and to the provisions of Section 74.024 and 74.025 of the Texas Government Code, these Rules of Judicial Education are hereby promulgated. RULE 2. APPELLATE, DISTRICT AND COUNTY- LEVEL COURT JUDGES. a. Each judge of an appellate court, district court, statutory county court, and county court performing judicial functions will, as an official duty: (1) complete before taking office, or within one year after taking office, at least 30 hours of instruction in the administrative duties of office and substantive, procedural and evidentiary laws unless the judge has previously complied with this requirement A-5 (2) (3) and has been absent from the bench less than one year before taking the present office, and each calendar year thereafter, complete at least 16 hours of instruction in substantive, procedural and evidentiary laws and court administration. Instruction credit completed during any calendar year in excess of the minimum number of hours required may be applied to the following year’s requirement. This carry-over provision applies to one year only. Any program sponsored by the following organizations or otherwise approved by the Supreme Court Education Committee, can be utilized to satisfy the requirements of Rule 2.a.: (1) (2) (3) (4) (3) (6) (7) (8) (9) Judicial Section of the State Bar of Texas Texas Center for the Judiciary, Inc. National Judicial College, Reno, Nevada Appellate Judges’ Conference of the American Bar Association, Chicago, Illinois American Academy of Judicial Education, Washington, D.C. Institute of Judicial Administration, N.Y.U., New York, N.Y. Texas College of Probate Judges National College of Probate Judges An accredited law school A-6 Gare er (10) (11) (12) A local, state or national bar association A professional organization devoted to improvement of the legal profession (such as the Texas Association of Defense Counsel and the Texas Trial Lawyers Association) The Texas Association of Counties, the County Judges and Commissioners Association of Texas or the V. G. Young Institute of Texas A & M University. ~< * * A-7 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386011_0830%3A1. Public record. Not legal advice.