Williams v. State

Clayton Williams appeals from his conviction for criminal nonsupport. He was convicted on his plea of guilty, and the trial court assessed his punishment at two years’ confinement in a state jail facility. Williams contends in a single point of error that the statute under which he was convicted, Tex. Pen. Code Ann. � 25.05 (Vernon Supp. 2002), is unconstitutional because it violates Article I, � 18 of the Texas Constitution. Tex. Const. art. I, � 18. That section provides that, “No person shall ever be imprisoned for debt.”

This Court has previously addressed this issue. In Lyons v. State, 835 S.W.2d 715, 718 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1992, pet. ref’d), we rejected an argument that a conviction under Tex. Pen. Code Ann. � 25.05 constitutes an impermissible imprisonment for debt. We held that imprisonment assessed as punishment for the violation of a statute or court order is not imprisonment for debt, even if the statute or court order has the effect of requiring a payment of money. Tex. Const. art. I, � 18 commentary, citing Ex parte Robertson, 27 Tex. Ct. App. 628, 11 S.W. 669 (1889); Dixon v. State, 2 Tex. 481 (1847); Ex parte Wagner, 905 S.W.2d 799, 803 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, orig. proceeding). The obligation that the law imposes on spouses to support one another and on parents to support their children is not considered a debt. See Ex parte Hall, 854 S.W.2d 656 (Tex. 1993); see also Freeland v. Freeland, 313 S.W.2d 943 (Tex. Civ. App.-Dallas 1958, no writ). *fn1 Accordingly, we will affirm the judgment of conviction.