Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Contact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge signals court will allow unsupervised visits if CPS clearance is filed in Eric Rodriguez case
Summary
In a docket call for State v. Eric Rodriguez, the judge said the state has no objection to a defense motion to lift supervised visitation restrictions after Child Protective Services closed its file; the court asked counsel to submit a signed order and set follow-up reset dates for an appellate question tied to a related motion.
The court told parties it would grant a defense request to allow unsupervised contact between defendant Eric Rodriguez and his 12-year-old son if the defense submitted an order showing Child Protective Services had closed its investigation and the mother had no safety concerns.
The state told the court it had no objection to the defense motion after confirming the CPS file was closed and that the biological mother expressed no reservations about unsupervised visits. The defendant, Eric Rodriguez, testified under oath that he shared joint custody with the child's mother on an every-other-week schedule.
Why it matters: Judges typically condition parental contact in criminal matters when child-safety concerns exist. The court's willingness to remove a supervision requirement hangs on formal proof from CPS and an order from counsel, both of which were missing from the electronic file when the case was called.
What the court ordered: The presiding judge asked defense counsel to prepare a short order (not the full motion) and email it to the coordinator for signature, and the judge said, "If y'all will write an order, the court then will sign the order and grant it." The court also confirmed that visits had been supervised prior to the motion and that CPS had closed its inquiry early in 2021. The child's age was stated in court as 12.
Separately, the court addressed an appellate procedure issue in a related Rodriguez matter. Defense appellate counsel filed a motion for reconsideration at the Court of Criminal Appeals asking where the Fourth Court of Appeals should return remaining issues; the trial judge granted a 60-day reset and said she would not charge the continuance to either party. The court reset the matter to September 11 to allow appellate clarification. The judge instructed both sides to complete discovery while the matter was pending.
Attributions: The state announced on the record that it had no objection to the defense motion and that a statement from the child's mother had been provided; Jaime Cavazos stated he would prepare the order for the judge to sign. Eric Rodriguez confirmed custody arrangements and the child's age on the record.
Next steps: Defense counsel was ordered to produce the signed order to the court coordinator by email. The case remains reset pending submission of that signed order and the appellate clarification discussed in the separate filing.
