Case Dismissed


Case: Crow v. Crow [PO-20-08][Choctaw, OK] and [Cause FM20-00269][Van Zandt]
Result: Dismissed with prejudice and Mother ordered to pay Dad’s attorney fees

Oklahoma State Courts Network

Haslam represented this father of two young boys whose mother absconded with them to Oklahoma – in direct violation of a Texas court order issued when she filed for divorce the day she left Texas. On top of that, once she got to Oklahoma, she sought an ex parte victim’s protective order [VPO] against the father seeking to forbid his contact with the boys and her.

Ex parte VPO’s are among the most abused legal tools – they permit the filing person to get legal relief against the accused without his presence to defend himself: just one product of decades of successful lobbying by our culture’s Feminist-Victimist Complex.  Here, the mother filed for divorce in Texas and made all kinds of claims about Dad to an Oklahoma judge before Dad even knew she’d moved out of their Texas house.  Remarkably, this judge heard her claims and granted her VPO without a court reporter present to record her allegations, leaving Dad unable to challenge those oral allegations later.

Once Dad hired Haslam, he quickly succeeded in removing this judge from the case.

Licensed in Oklahoma and Texas, Haslam urged Oklahoma motions to return the VPO to Texas per the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act [UCCJEA]. After cross-examining the mother under oath in Oklahoma, the new Oklahoma judge dismissed the VPO “protecting” father’s two sons  and agreed to return the surviving VPO “protecting” mother to Texas: Haslam wanted the Texas divorce court judge to know exactly what she’d been up to. Crucially, Haslam also persuaded the Oklahoma Court to make a finding that mother had behaved inappropriately in removing the boys to Oklahoma.  This finding of “inappropriate conduct” as defined in the UCCJEA is a way to obtain legal fees and costs down the road….

With the VPO now before the Texas divorce court judge, Haslam persuaded the judge to dismiss the remaining VPO forever.  THEN, Haslam persuaded the Texas judge to award Dad $17,000+ in attorney fees and costs! Not only does this restore Dad financially, it educates the Texas divorce judge about the mother’s months of falsehoods and violations of Texas orders, setting Dad up well as his divorce lawyer fights for custody and child support before that very same Texas judge.

1-22-2021 Filemarked Order Dismissing with Prejudice and Awarding Fees


In need of an exceptional divorce lawyer?

Mr. Haslam is pleased to recommend Tina Hall Montoya. Her website is



Case: ex parte G.J.M., a Child [Cause 83618] [Lamar, TX]
Result: Son stolen by mother returned to Dad

Stealing a child – even by a parent – is often one and likely two distinct felonies in Texas. Kidnapping and interference with child custody are separate offenses and not precluded by double jeopardy jurisprudence.

Here, a mother absconded with her young son from Lamar County [TX] to a remote area of Washington State. As in almost all paternity orders and divorce litigation, the Lamar County paternity order governing the home of this child had a 75-mile geographic limitation on how far away either parent could move him. When Dad would not agree to her taking the boy to WA state to live – she just took him.  Didn’t tell him she was leaving or where she was going.  At least as importantly, she didn’t go to court first….

After months of investigation, the family located her in a remote area near Tacoma and hired Haslam. Haslam succeeded in obtaining a writ of habeus corpus and an order to enforce possession and access to the child from the Lamar County court, sent the papers to local WA authorities and prepared to seize the child for his return. Wisely, the mother delivered the boy to them and he was returned to Dad as litigation began.

After hearing the evidence, the Lamar County judge ordered a switch in primary custody to Dad back in Lamar County, ordered mother to pay Dad’s attorney’s fees and costs and ordered mother to begin paying dad monthly child support.

Deferred Adjudication


Criminal Charge: Felony Assault with a Dangerous Weapon
Case: State of Oklahoma v. X [Choctaw]
Result: Reduced to Misdemeanor and Deferred Six Months

Oklahoma State Courts Network

Because this young defendant’s charge was reduced to a misdemeanor and deferred for 6 months, it will be expunged and stricken from public record upon successful completion of the short probationary period. Accordingly, his name is omitted here.

Charged with felony assault with a dangerous weapon, a charge that carries up to 10 years in the state penitentiary, the Choctaw County [OK] judge originally appointed him a lawyer. However, when the defendant rejected the State’s original plea bargain, the judge determined he was no longer poor enough to deserve an appointed lawyer and gave him a deadline to hire one. Eventually the judge jailed him because he couldn’t hire a lawyer. [It’s against the law for a judge to look beyond the wallet of the defendant when determining whether a court-appointed lawyer is required, but that didn’t stop this court]. McMillion v State, 742 P.2d 1158 [1987] and Spain v. District Court of Tulsa County, 882 P.2d 79 [1994].

His family hired Haslam, who promptly filed a motion and achieved his release from custody the day after he was jailed. Haslam then had the district court judge disqualified for refusing to afford this defendant a court reporter – the judge’s wife – at a motion hearing. Thereafter, he sued the City of Hugo under the Oklahoma Public Information Act for refusing to produce various police reports – this civil lawsuit settled for approximately $6,000 and the missing police reports were promptly coughed up.

With the missing evidence in hand, the Choctaw County prosecutor readily reduced the felony to the misdemeanor and 6 months deferred adjudication. The case will be expunged from his record.