San Patricio County Attorney Tamara Cochran-May (R) signed an August 17 motion asking a judge to dismiss a misdemeanor case against Texas attorney Christopher “CJ” Grisham while asserting that Grisham “has agreed to never step foot in San Patricio County in the future.”
Grisham says he never made that agreement.
The disputed language appears in State of Texas v. Christopher John Grisham, Cause No. 25-CR-95051-B, in San Patricio County Court at Law No. 2. The motion identifies the charge as disrupting a meeting or procession, a Class B misdemeanor under Texas law.
The motion, provided to The Dallas Express, lists three reasons for dismissal: witnesses involved in the case and subpoenaed for trial agreed to dismissal; Grisham allegedly agreed never to return to San Patricio County; and dismissal would serve “the interest of justice.”
Cochran-May signed the motion, but the copy provided to The Dallas Express shows blank “Agreed to” signature lines for Grisham and defense attorney Reece Ringnald. A certificate of service says the county attorney’s office provided the motion to Ringnald on August 17.
Motion does not itself ban Grisham
The document does not itself dismiss the case or impose a countywide ban. Article 32.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure allows the state’s attorney to seek dismissal with the court’s permission and states that no criminal case may be dismissed without the presiding judge’s consent.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has called that judicial approval mandatory. In a 2002 ruling involving an immunity agreement, the court said prosecutors retain primary authority to initiate dismissals and craft the conditions of such agreements, subject to a trial judge’s veto.
That ruling did not address a permanent prohibition on entering an entire county. It therefore does not resolve whether the provision described in Grisham’s motion would be enforceable. The motion also does not explain how the no-entry language would operate after dismissal.
Grisham says he rejected the term
Grisham wrote Tuesday on X that he would not accept the provision and accused county officials of misusing the criminal justice system.
“This is unethical, immoral, and illegal and I won’t let it go unanswered,” Grisham wrote.
I don't know who the fuck San Patricio County Attorney Tamara Cochran-May thinks she is, but I don't get intimidated by government thugs. I don't kneel or bow to statist tyrants who use the law to oppress their political opponents or people they don't like. This is unethical,… pic.twitter.com/qBcJKbwb4P
— Texas2AAttorney (@CJGRISHAM) August 19, 2026
Grisham also argued that accepting the provision could prevent him from entering San Patricio County to represent Jason Followell or appear as a witness in Followell’s case. A federal docket lists Grisham as Followell’s attorney in a civil-rights lawsuit against the City of Aransas Pass and city officials.
The dismissal motion does not state that its no-return language was designed to interfere with Grisham’s representation of Followell, and the records reviewed by The Dallas Express do not establish Cochran-May’s motive.
Case traces to Aransas Pass council meeting
The prosecution traces to a January 16, 2024, Aransas Pass City Council meeting. Official meeting minutes say Followell criticized the police chief and city policies before then-Mayor Ramiro Gomez ordered officers to remove him for using profanity and violating the city’s Rules of Decorum.
Grisham then told the council that he had witnessed a violation of Followell’s rights, read a statement on civil rights and cited court cases. The minutes say Grisham called the city’s decorum rules unconstitutional. Gomez then ordered officers to remove Grisham for profanity and a decorum violation. Grisham responded that he would sue the city if officers escorted him out.
Authorities later charged Grisham with disrupting a meeting or procession. The charge remains an allegation unless and until a court enters a conviction.
City later revisited both prosecutions
The Aransas Pass City Council returned to Grisham’s prosecution and a separate criminal case against Followell during a July 15, 2025, executive session.
After reconvening, council members unanimously directed City Attorney Epimenio Ysassi to prepare a letter to San Patricio County regarding Grisham’s case. The public minutes do not disclose what the council wanted the letter to say.
The council also voted unanimously that Followell’s criminal case should be dismissed because the City of Aransas Pass had no interest in pursuing the charges, according to the minutes.
More than a year later, Cochran-May’s motion seeks dismissal of Grisham’s case while stating that he agreed never to return to San Patricio County. Grisham denies accepting that term. The materials provided to The Dallas Express show the state’s motion and certificate of service, not a judge-signed dismissal order.
