Eddie Dale Underwood v. the State of Texas

Order filed October 27, 2022

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-22-00218-CR __________

EDDIE DALE UNDERWOOD, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 259th District Court Jones County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 6880-D

ORDER We have reviewed the “Motion to Recuse Appellate Judges” filed in this cause on October 18, 2022, as it pertains to seeking the recusal of Chief Justice John M. Bailey. Pursuant to Rule 16.3(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Chief Justice Bailey has considered the motion in chambers. Chief Justice Bailey has found no reason to recuse himself and, pursuant to Rule 16.3(b), has certified the issue to the entire court for a determination by the other justices of this court. 1 See

1 A copy of Chief Justice Bailey’s written certification is attached to this order.

TEX. R. APP. P. 16.3(b). Justice W. Stacy Trotter and Justice W. Bruce Williams have decided the matter without Chief Justice Bailey’s participation. The recusal of appellate court justices is controlled by Rule 16 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The grounds for recusal of an appellate court justice are provided in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 16.2; see TEX. R. CIV. P. 18b. We find no reason for Chief Justice Bailey to recuse himself and hold that none of the grounds set out in Rule 18b are applicable to Chief Justice Bailey in this case. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 18b; see also Manges v. Guerra, 673 S.W.2d 180, 185 (Tex. 1984); McCullough v. Kitzman, 50 S.W.3d 87, 88 (Tex. App.—Waco 2001, pet. denied). The request for the recusal of Chief Justice John M. Bailey is denied.

PER CURIAM

October 27, 2022 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Trotter, J., and Williams, J. Bailey, C.J., not participating.