DISBARRED LEGAL EAGLE WIGHTMAN, D.A., ERR, AGAIN

By Juan Montoya
As is his wont, self-proclaimed legal scholar Robert Wightman – AKA the Wrath of the Writ of Mandamus and the Scourge of Insurance companies – has taken up his keyboard to excoriate the legally uninitiated in the ways of Da Law.
Let's cut to the chase.
He has taken County Court-at-Law Laura Betancourt to task for issuing (and then recalling) a warrant Aug. 11, 2015 on a motion by the Cameron County District's Office to Adjudicate Guilt and revoke the probation of Victor Garcia, the political nephew of Cameron County District Attorney Luis V. Saenz.
The hearing was duly held and the order to adjudicate and a warrant was issued for Garcia's arrest because he had broken probation by getting a second DWI before his probationary period ended Aug. 13, 2015, two days after the state's motion..
Notice the the motion to adjudicate was made for the state by the DA's Office.
There's the snag.
On Aug. 14, 2014, Ed Cyganiewicz, was named pro-tem attorney to represent the DA's Office in its case against Garcia, specifically because of the relationship between the defendant(s) and Saenz. The order states that Cyganiewicz made his appearance for the State of Texas and would represent the state "in all aspects" of the above-mentioned case..."
If Cyganiewicz is representing the state "in all aspects" of the case, it was Cyganiewicz who had to make the motion and not the DA's Office. The docket shows that the exact opposite happened and that's why Noe Garza, Garcia's attorney, got the warrant recalled in the revocation. A hearing is scheduled for the motion on Feb. 11, 2016.
The Texas Court of Appeals has found (in Coleman vs. State of Texas 246 S.W. 3rd 76) that "the appointment of an attorney pro tem lasts until the purposes contemplated by that appointment are fulfilled."
The appellate court found in this case that the jurisdiction of an attorney pro tem can "continue to represent the state (even) after a newly elected district attorney, who was not disqualified, takes office."
There is a difference between a special prosecutor and a attorney pro-tem. A special prosecutor participates in a case only to the extent allowed by the district attorney and operates under his supervision. An attorney pro-tem assumes the duties of the district attorney, acts independently, and , in effect, replaces the district attorney. Cyganiewicz, as the docket shows, was named attorney pro-tem.
Voluntary recusal allows the DA to avoid conflicts of interest and even the appearance of impropriety by deciding not to participate in certain cases.
That seems pretty clear cut to us. Does this warrant Wightman calling Betancourt "corrupt" and that she is "no different than Abel Limas?
Who messed up here?
Cyganiewicz was appointed attorney pro-tem for the simple reason that he would represent the state and remove any conflict of interest in the matter. For the DA's Office to file a motion on the state's behalf defeats the purpose of the appointment of the attorney pro-tem.
Faced with these facts, what else could Betancourt do?
If Cyganiewicz failed to appear with his own motion as attorney pro tem for the state two days before Garcia's probation ran out, did he do it on purpose? Did the DA forget Cyganiewicz was representing the state and filed the Aug. 11 motion regardless?
These are legitimate questions. We're sure Wightman will as usual subject us to his wisdom and issue a voluminous (and footnoted) legal essay on the subject running all of 10 PC screens before we're all done with this.
Politically, however, the fact that the Feb. 11 hearing for his nephew comes five days before the start of early voting for the Democratic primary does not bode well for the "Respect Restored" candidacy of DA Saenz.
All this legal babble has made us thirsty. Later, Bobo.