Debt Collector

Take 2: Attorney Chris Gregg Falsely Refuses PIA Request in Continued Blackballin’ of LIT by Texas Gov. Entities

Police recording, with certain portions redacted for privacy is subject to disclosure under the PIA as part of a completed investigation.

Motel Arrest of Andrew Lehman after Alleged Prostitution and Drugs Bust Leads to Criminal Prosecution and Admission of Guilt by Lehman

Attorney Chris Gregg is delayin’ sending any information in the hopes that the destruction of evidence will happen well before that date, but attorney Chris Gregg, the City and the Courts are effectively on a spoilation notice by Mark Burke pertaining to this active PIA request regarding Andrew Lehman.

APR 18, 2023 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: JUL 13, 2023

Top of the morn’ to you Chris,

Y’all know legally you have to provide a redacted version.

See; Travis v. Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, No. 03-14-00314-CV, at *1 (Tex. App. Aug. 18, 2016) (“The Attorney General, in a letter opinion issued after Travis pleaded guilty to the DWI charge, determined that the dashboard recording, with certain portions redacted for privacy reasons, was subject to disclosure under the PIA as part of a completed investigation.”)

Let me know when it will be made available.

Cheers
Mark Burke

July 17, 2023

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7018 1830 0001 4327 0696

Attorney General Ken Paxton
Open Records Division
P.O. Box 12548
Austin, Texas 78711

RE:      Open Records Request for Information to the City of Nassau Bay, Texas, NB1637. Dear General Paxton:

The following documents are enclosed for your review and consideration in the above-referenced matter:

(1)   The City of Nassau Bay’s (hereinafter referred to as “City”) response to said Request, objecting to all information and identifying the basis for which the City deems the data to be exempt.

(2)   City’s documents responsive to the request (Exhibit B).

(3)   Copy of Mark Burke’s open records request received by the City on July 7, 2023 (Exhibit A).

REQUEST

The City respectfully requests an open records determination as to whether the documents must be produced and\or furnished.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND EXEMPTIONS

The identity of the requestor and the documents requested shall be identified below. The below- described objections give rise to the City’s belief that the documents in its possession are exempt from public disclosure.

OPEN RECORDS REQUEST

1)                  Mark Burke’s request is dated July 7, 2023; the request was received by the City on July 7, 2023.

Mr. Burke requests that the City produce “the full report for Nassau Bay PD Case 23-00091 including: Type of records Public Information Report Arrest Record/Jail Booking Blotter Case File Incident/Offense Report Mug Shot/Booking Photo BWC (body-worn-camera).”

CITY’S OBJECTION

The City objects to the disclosure of the following information:

Pursuant to Section 552.108 of the Texas Government Code, the City believes that the documents attached hereto are exempt from public disclosure.

Section 552.108 states the following:

(a)                Information held by a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that deals with the detention, investigation, or prosecution of crime is excepted from the requirement of Section 552.021 if:

(2)   it is information that deals with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime only in relation to an investigation that did not result in conviction or deferred adjudication.

(b)               An internal record or notation of a law enforcement agency or prosecutor that is maintained for internal use in matters relating to law enforcement or prosecuting is excepted from the requirements of Section 552.001 if:

(2)    the internal record or notation relates to law enforcement only in relation to an investigation that did not result in conviction or deferred adjudication.

The fact is that the documents requested to be disclosed are confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to Section 552.108 of the Texas Government Code because the information requested is being held by the Nassau Bay Police Department’s law enforcement agency and deals with the detection, investigation or prosecution of a crime.

All the attached documents relate to prior criminal cases against two defendants.

One defendant was Andrew Lehman who was charged with POSS CS PG 1/1-B>=4G<200G.

Mr. Lehman accepted deferred adjudication for the criminal charge.

However, the other defendant in the same episode is Alexzandria Meaux. Ms. Meaux was charged with POSS CS PG 1/1-B>=4G<200G, and 2 theft charges.

For Ms. Meaux the investigation and prosecution did not result in a conviction or deferred adjudication for her. Rather, all three criminal cases against Ms. Meaux were dismissed by the Court.

The requested full report and the body worn camera footage are so intertwined with both defendants, Lehman and Meaux that the production of the requested full detailed report and body worn camera footage for Lehman would violate the concluded case exception as to the documents related to Ms. Meaux. As such, the documents are exempt from public disclosure.

Similarly, the documents requested to be disclosed are confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to Section 552.108 of the Texas Government Code because the information requested is part of an internal record or notation held by the Nassau Bay Police Department’s law enforcement agency and deals with the detection, investigation or prosecution of crime.

As shown above, all the attached documents relate to prior criminal cases against two defendants.

One defendant was Andrew Lehman who was charged with POSS CS PG 1/1-B>=4G<200G. Mr. Lehman accepted deferred adjudication for the criminal charge.

However, the other defendant in the same episode is Alexandria Meaux.

Ms. Meaux was charged with POSS CS PG 1/1-B>=4G<200G, and 2 theft charges.

For Ms. Meaux the investigation and prosecution did not result in a conviction or deferred adjudication for her.

Rather, all three criminal cases were dismissed by the Court.

The requested full report and the body worn camera footage are so intertwined with both defendants, Lehman and Meaux that the production of the requested full detailed report and body worn camera footage would violate the concluded case exception as to the documents related to Ms. Meaux. As such, the documents are exempt from public disclosure.

Sincerely,

Christopher Gregg CAG/
Gregg & Gregg, P.C. City Attorney
City of Nassau Bay, Texas Enclosures

cc:        City of Nassau Bay, Texas

Mark Burke blog@bloggerinc.org

noreply@civicplus.com

To:

Blogger Inc

Fri 7/7/2023 9:09 AM


Request for Disclosure of Public Information

Open Records Request
According to Texas Government Code Chapter 552, the City of Nassau Bay operates as a governing body and information and records are subject to the Texas Public Information Act. The purpose of the Public Information Act is to maintain the people’s control over the instruments they have created.

All information requests by the public for official documents from the City of Nassau Bay should be directed through the City Secretary’s Office. Every effort is made to expedite all requests for disclosure of public information; however, due personnel demands and schedules, there are incidents when the disclosure of records may take the time allowed by law (10 business days). If the information cannot be produced for inspection or duplication within 10 business days after the request is made, the City of Nassau Bay will certify in writing a reasonable time when the information will be made available.

If you do not receive a response to your request or some other form of communication about your request from the City within 10 business days of your request, please call the Office of the City Secretary at 281-336-6281.
First and Last Name
Mark Burke
Phone Number
3467632074
Date of Request
7/7/2023
Address
46 Kingwood Greens Dr
City
Kingwood
State
TX
Zip
77339
DATE, NAME & DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORD
I refer to Incident 2300091 which was filed as an open records request on 4/18/2023.

This would ultimately be referred to your attorney’s and they would submit a request to TXAG seeking to withhold information as the case was active in Harris County criminal court, “See criminal case; The State of Texas vs. LEHMAN, ANDREW (SPN: 01469689) (DOB: 11/22/1977) Case No. 180764001010- 3 Active – CRIMINAL(A)”.

The TXAG responded with the letter found here; https://lawsintexas.com/pr/2my.

The city attorneys responded by email on Jul 6, 2023 enclosing the basic report as found here; https://lawsintexas.com/pr/2mz.

In the interim, the criminal case has been disposed of (DEFERRED ADJUDICATION OF GUILT, Case Completion Date; 5/25/2023) and so makes the opinion from TXAG moot.

As such, I now submit a new request for the full report for Nassau PD Case 23-00091 including; Type of Records: Public Information Report Arrest Record / Jail Booking Blotter Case File Incident/Offense Report Mug Shot / Booking Photo BWC (Body-Worn Camera)

To properly request body worn camera video, a member of the public is required to provide all of the following information:

1. The date and approximate time of the recording;

02/17/2023 at approximately 1240 hours

The specific location where the recording occurred;

3000 block of Nasa Pkwy

and 3.

The name of one or more involved parties known to be a subject of the recording.

ANDREW PETER LEHMAN

Requested by:
Mark Burke
Production of Records
Emailed
Email Address
blog@bloggerinc.org
Exception to Open Records Act
Under the Texas Public Information Act, there are a number of exceptions to the requirement that the public be granted access to any information by a governmental body. The City Secretary’s Office will notify you should your request meet any exceptions. Please contact the City Secretary’s Office for more information at (281) 336-6281.

Blogger Inc

To:

Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>
Cc:

Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>

Mon 7/3/2023 9:35 AM

Just to confirm Chris,

For the record, are you refusing despite the fact the AG response is overdue, and secondly, as the case is now effectively dismissed, with Andrew Lehman admitting to being a felon with an adjudicated finding of 3 years supervision per Order from Harris County criminal case, thus your request is moot?

Cheers
Mark


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Monday, July 3, 2023 8:12 AMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Cc: Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mark,

The City still awaits the Attorney General decision in response to its filed brief.

The City will take its direction from that decision.

Thanks,

Chris

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Monday, July 3, 2023 6:38 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Good morning Gents,

In light of recent communications and said deadlines expired, I formally request that you timely provide the information requested in my original records request.

Cheers

Mark


From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Friday, June 30, 2023 7:37 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Calendar Reminder Chris,

It’s the 30th.

Cheers, Mark


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Friday, June 16, 2023 11:41 AMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Cc: Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mark,

If your question is “does that mean the list of discovery set to be destroyed by the court is available from the City”, I do not know that answer.

The City has the detailed event report (that is objected to and you seek under your April 18, 2023 open records request).  We still await the AG ruling on the City’s filed brief.

I will take direction from the AG ruling.

Thanks,

Chris

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Friday, June 16, 2023 8:20 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Top of the morn’

My err on the 45 business days… 30 Jun is deadline.

How’s about the other part of the (City) question Chris?

Cheers

Mark


From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2023 8:55 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Fw: NB1621 Burke

Just in case you missed my last reply.


From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:26 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Hi Chris

That was a typo re county. I meant city, so could you answer the question?

Second, 45 days from Apr. 25, is Sat. 10, Jun – this is Tues.  13 Jun? The response is late.

Cheers

Mark


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:40 AMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mark,

I do not represent the County.  I only represent the City.

I cannot answer any questions about the County.

The Texas AG still has time to issue a decision.  It has 45 business days from the date the AG received the request for a decision.  The City’s request for a decision was on April 26, 2023.

I will let you know once I receive a decision from the AG.

Thanks,

Chris

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:16 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Chris,

Acknowledged. Does that mean the list of discovery set to be destroyed by the court is available from the county?

Also, the TXAG reply is past due, what happens now, are you obligated to release the records I have requested?

Cheers

Mark


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 1:50 PMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mark,

Attached is the public copy of the event repot.

Thanks,

Chris Gregg

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Monday, June 5, 2023 5:46 PMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Chris,

Yes, I heard about the hack and I don’t want you to go to any unnecessary additional work.

That stated, my concern is that the records are set to be destroyed by HC Criminal Court (after 90 days) and if your City records are wiped, when there’s currently court discovery documents available from case; 180764001010 – The State of Texas vs. LEHMAN, ANDREW (Court 263) – see attached extract, then that opens the City to potentially unnecessary legal issues, especially when you’re on notice that information is readily available now.

Also, is this discovery list also similar to the “event report” you would provide? It includes camera footage which I’d ideally like as part of the basic report information. Can you identify what you would be able to provide now?

Let me have your thoughts and comments.

Cheers

Mark


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Monday, June 5, 2023 3:53 PMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Cc: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mark,

I was unaware you did not have a “public copy” of the event report.

Unfortunately, the City had to file a catastrophe notice with the AG last week.  It was required due to a cyber-attack the City experienced on its systems.

At this point, the City is unable to retrieve the public copy for me.

After the City’s systems are restored, I expect the public copy to be sent to me.  Upon receipt, I will forward to you.

Thanks,

Chris Gregg

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Monday, June 5, 2023 3:07 PMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Cc: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Good day Chris,

I have reviewed the codes and the request you sent to the TXAG and the 45 days expires Saturday for the AG’s response, so I would anticipate a reply this week.

Access to basic information remains both a statutory and constitutional right.

In particular, I would like the basic information (which I have not received), with emphasis on “vehicles involved, a detailed description of the offense in question and the names of investigating officers.”.

See, in relevant part;

“In the Houston Chronicle case the court of civil appeals held that the public has the right of access to the basic information concerning a crime, such as the offense committed, the location of the crime, the identification of the complainant, the premises involved, the time of the occurrence, the property involved, vehicles involved, a detailed description of the offense in question and the names of investigating officers.”

Aim Media Tex. v. City of Odessa, No. 11-22-00052-CV, at *15 n.6 (Tex. App. Mar. 16, 2023).

Please let me know when this basic information will be available.

Cheers,

Mark

Blogger Inc.


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Friday, June 2, 2023 7:53 AMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Cc: Dick Gregg Jr. <dgreggjr@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Section 552.301 and Section 552.306 Texas Government Code.

Thanks,

Chris

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2023 3:48 PMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Can you please cite to statute you rely upon  Mr Gregg?


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2023 3:46 PMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Subject: RE: NB1621 Burke

Mr. Burke,

Thank you for the communication; however, I have to follow the legal process.

The City’s brief is still pending with the Attorney General’s Office.

Once I receive their decision, I will act accordingly.

Thanks,

Chris Gregg

From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2023 10:34 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Mr Gregg,

The case before Harris County relative to this open records request has been dismissed.

As such, I look forward to receiving my requested information in a timely manner.

Cheers,

Mark Burke


From: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 7:57 PMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: Re: NB1621 Burke

Duly noted Mr Gregg.

No doubt you’ll get a faster response from indicted Ken Paxton’s AG office, than substitute service in this separate matter in Harris County District Court (civil);

202277073 – VILLAGE PLACE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC vs. STRANGE, ROBERT (Court 133).

Mr Andrew Lehman, the incorrectly self-labeled lawyer, who is a paralegal and business owner with a history of fraudulent behavior (per CFPB) is a real risk to human lives, and yet he’s been allowed to remain on bond after discharging a weapon in Galveston, using his Porsche Cayenne against a girlfriend in Harris County as a deadly weapon, domestic abuse, drug charges etc.

That’s why we need Laws In Texas to protect law abiding citizens and not the criminals, Texas has it the wrong way around.

Cheers,

Mark Burke

Blogger Inc.


From: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 8:44 AMTo: Blogger Inc <blog@bloggerinc.org>Subject: FW: NB1621 Burke

Mr. Burke,

Attached is the brief of firm filed with the Attorney General (AG) today regarding your open records request in Nassau Bay.

Our firm will await a decision from the AG.

Thanks,

Chris Gregg

From: Sheri Kennedy <skennedy@gregg-gregg.com>Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 8:41 AMTo: Chris Gregg <cagregg@gregg-gregg.com>Subject: NB1621 Burke

Requestor copy.

Sheri Kennedy Smith

skennedy@gregg-gregg.com

16055 Space Center BoulevardSuite 150Houston, Texas 77062Phone: (281) 480-1211 Fax: (281) 480-1210

www.gregg-gregg.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This transmission may be: (1) subject to the Attorney-Client Privilege, (2) an attorney work product, or (3) strictly confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you may not disclose, print, copy or disseminate this information.  If you have received this in error, please reply and notify the sender (only) at 281-480-1211 and delete the message.  Unauthorized interception of this correspondence is a violation of federal criminal law.”

**ATTENTION PUBLIC OFFICIALS!!**

Please note that any correspondence, such as e-mails or letters, sent to City Staff or City Officials may become a public record and made available for Public/Media review.  Also, a “Reply to All” of this e-mail could lead to a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Please reply only to the sender.

Request for Disclosure of Public Information

Open Records Request

According to Texas Government Code Chapter 552, the City of Nassau Bay operates as a governing body and information and records are subject to the Texas Public Information Act. The purpose of the Public Information Act is to maintain the people’s control over the instruments they have created.

All information requests by the public for official documents from the City of Nassau Bay should be directed through the City Secretary’s Office. Every effort is made to expedite all requests for disclosure of public information; however, due personnel demands and schedules, there are incidents when the disclosure of records may take the time allowed by law (10 business days). If the information cannot be produced for inspection or duplication within 10 business days after the request is made, the City of Nassau Bay will certify in writing a reasonable time when the information will be made available.

If you do not receive a response to your request or some other form of communication about your request from the City within 10 business days of your request, please call the Office of the City Secretary at 281-336-6281.
First and Last Name
Mark Burke
Phone Number
13467632074
Date of Request
4/18/2023
Address
46 Kingwood Greens Dr
City
Kingwood
State
TX
Zip
77339
DATE, NAME & DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORD
I filed a request at HPD and they referred me here with case reference no. below;

Please forward your request to Nassau Bay PD Case 2200091.

===================

RE: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST of April 18, 2023, Reference # P047307-041823

Dear Mark Burke,

The Houston Police Department received a public information request from you on April 18, 2023. Your request mentioned:

“See criminal case; The State of Texas vs. LEHMAN, ANDREW (SPN: 01469689) (DOB: 11/22/1977)
Case No. 180764001010- 3 Active – CRIMINAL(A)”

The Houston Police Department has reviewed its files and has determined there are no responsive documents to your request. Please forward your request to Nassau Bay PD Case 2200091. We are closing our file on this matter.

If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this further, you may contact Open Records at 713-308-9173.

Sincerely,

Claudia German
Administrative Assistant
Houston Police Department (HPD)
Production of Records
Emailed
Email Address
blog@bloggerinc.org
Exception to Open Records Act
Under the Texas Public Information Act, there are a number of exceptions to the requirement that the public be granted access to any information by a governmental body. The City Secretary’s Office will notify you should your request meet any exceptions. Please contact the City Secretary’s Office for more information at (281) 336-6281.

Compare the public record released record made available to Burke with the actual list of available documents and body worn camera videos per the criminal case.

This evidence is scheduled for destruction in the near future.

Case (Cause) Number Style File Date Court Status Type Of Action / Offense
244997801010- 2
Inactive(I)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 3/17/2023 7 Defendant: Warrant or Citation Issued(N)
Disposition:
THEFT >=$100<$750 (M) eSubpoena
244608101010- 2
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987)
2/19/2023 7 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
THEFT >=$100<$750 (M) eSubpoena
180763801010- 3
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 2/18/2023 180 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
POSS CS PG 1 / 1-B >=4G<200G (F) eSubpoena
17844830101A- 5
Active – CRIMINAL(A)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987)
8/31/2022 180 Defendant: Warrant or Citation Issued(N)
Disposition:
178448301010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 8/26/2022 180 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
POSS CS PG 1 <1G (F) eSubpoena
238415601010- 2
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ANGEL NICOLE (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986)
11/19/2021 12 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
ASSAULT-BODILY INJURY (M) eSubpoena
236967401010- 2
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEX JACOB (SPN: 03106298) (DOB: 12/12/1998) 8/1/2021 10 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
UNLAW CARRY WPN (M) eSubpoena
158332001010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ANGEL NICOLE (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986)
3/13/2018 179 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
AGG ASSAULT W / DEADLY WEAPON (F) eSubpoena
211038501010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 9/7/2016 10 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
OUT OF COUNTY – FUGITIVE (M) eSubpoena
20794820101A- 4
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987)
7/18/2016 11 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition:
14881090101A- 5
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 7/8/2016 174 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition:
209257901010- 2
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ANGEL (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986)
5/22/2016 10 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
ASSAULT-FAMILY MEMBER (M) eSubpoena
207948201010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 3/11/2016 11 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
FAILURE TO STOP & GIVE INFO (M) eSubpoena
148810901010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987)
11/11/2015 174 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
POSS CS PG 1 <1G (F) eSubpoena
143224401010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ANGEL NICOLE (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986) 6/18/2014 179 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
AGG ASSAULT W / DEADLY WEAPON (F) eSubpoena
177641601010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ANGEL NICOLE (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986)
8/21/2011 9 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
RESIST ARR-SEARCH (M) eSubpoena
173098301010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987) 1/10/2011 6 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
THEFT-AGGREGATE $50-500 (M) eSubpoena
126948901010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ALEXZANDRIA LAWREN (SPN: 02504851) (DOB: 09/07/1987)
7/6/2010 183 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
CREDIT / DEBIT CARD ABUSE (F) eSubpoena
119283601010- 3
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ANTHONY M (SPN: 02039415) (DOB: 06/02/1970) 11/22/2008 337 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
FAIL TO STOP AND RENDER AID (F) eSubpoena
133078001010- 2
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, AMY MARIE (SPN: 02093680) (DOB: 11/12/1986)
10/1/2005 9 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
DRIVING WHILE LIC SUSPENDED (M) eSubpoena
125011201010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ANGEL NICOLE (SPN: 02089269) (DOB: 02/26/1986) 7/29/2004 4 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
ASSAULT-BODILY INJURY (M) eSubpoena
097621101010- 2
Complete(C)
The State of Texas vs.
MEAUX, ANTHONY WADE (SPN: 00917098) (DOB: 10/18/1959)
12/13/1987 10 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Disposed(DISP)
DWI 1ST (M) eSubpoena
029010601010- 3
Dismissed(D)
The State of Texas vs. MEAUX, ALBERT (SPN: 00259743) 12/26/1978 208 Defendant: Disposed(D)
Disposition: Dismissed(DISM)
AGG ROBBERY-DEADLY WPN (F) eSubpoena
02052020101A- 5
Execution Returned(V)
STATE OF TEXAS vs.
MEAUX, ALBERT (SPN: 00421665)
1/17/1974 174 Defendant: Unexecuted(U)
Disposition:

LIT UPDATE

JUN 2, 2023

By statute, a court may authorize an individual to initiate a lawsuit by proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP), so that the individual does not have to prepay the filing fee.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

To obtain IFP status, individuals must submit an affidavit attesting to their poverty.

Id.

The IFP affidavit is a simple form asking an individual about his or her financial resources.

Mullins v. Hallmark Data Sys., LLC, 511 F. Supp. 2d 928, 942 (N.D. Ill. 2007)

(“The IFP forms [sic] clearly and unambiguously asks questions in plain English on a form designed for use by
non-lawyers.”).

Of course, proceeding IFP “is a privilege, not a right.”

Camp v. Oliver, 798F.2d 434, 437 (11th Cir. 1986).

Take 2: Attorney Chris Gregg Falsely Refuses PIA Request in Continued Blackballin’ of LIT by Texas Gov. Entities
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top