Ex Parte Cameron Michael Moon

Summary

This concurring opinion addresses whether Cameron Michael Moon could raise an as-applied due-process challenge to Texas Family Code section 54.02(j) in a pretrial habeas appeal. The opinion concurs in the judgment that the claim was not cognizable under existing precedent but argues that pretrial review should be permitted because the challenge concerns the validity of transferring Moon, who committed the alleged offense as a juvenile, to adult criminal court.

Holdings

1. The facial constitutional challenge fails because Moon cannot establish that section 54.02(j) is unconstitutional as applied to all persons subject to the statute.
2. Under existing Texas precedent, a defendant generally may not litigate an as-applied constitutional challenge to a statute before trial, although recognized exceptions include double-jeopardy and bail claims.
3. The concurrence would hold that Moon should be permitted to bring his as-applied due-process challenge before trial because delaying review until after trial would effectively undermine the right he claims was violated.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Moon's facial constitutional challenge to Texas Family Code section 54.02(j) failed because he could not show that the statute was unconstitutional as to every person subject to it.
2. Whether Moon could raise an as-applied due-process challenge to his transfer under section 54.02(j) in a pretrial habeas proceeding.
3. Whether existing Texas precedent should be reconsidered because requiring Moon to wait until after trial to challenge the transfer would effectively undermine the asserted right to avoid adult prosecution absent compliance with section 54.02(a).

Disposition

affirmed