Garland Code Compliance Continue Cover Up Efforts for Wrongdoing, Misconduct and Dishonesty With Court Case

I have 7 code compliance citations that I am fighting and am currently waiting for my case to be heard with a trial by jury. It is scheduled for December 4th, 2017 but, the City of Garland is known for delaying trial dates as long as they can. The court sets a trial date and when that day arrives, the judge calls the defendants up to the bench and explains that they are overbooked that day and there is no way they will be able to get to their case that day. The court resets the trial for another day.
The new date arrives and the judge repeats the process. Garland courts are known for doing this to people. The court repeats this delay tactic until your case can't be delayed further due to it being on the top of the courts docket that day.
People think, "Finally! I get my day in court!"



Before your case gets started however, the prosecutor calls you over and gives you some reason why they aren't able to proceed with your trial. They can't reset it again so, they dismiss the charges against you. Case dismissed.

Most defendants are happy with that outcome but, I think it is a violation of our rights. We have a right to have a speedy trial. Trial resets that last over a year only to be dismissed rather than allow a defendant to be heard is hardly fair.
In my case... I really WANT my case to be heard by a jury. I WANT the information I have to be heard and for it to become part of the public record. I WANT the unethical people who work for Garland code compliance to have to answer for their misconduct, lying and wrongdoing against the residents of the city. It is next to impossible for a defendant to get a fair trial that a jury will hear. The people who work in code enforcement are well aware of that fact. They know that they can do almost anything they want against a citizen because, consequences will only be possible if someone files a law suit in a district court. The bottom line: If someone wants a city department or employee to face justice for their actions, it will cost money! The City of Garland and the corrupt people who work for the city can do as they please.

One example of an employee doing as they please is about Garland Code Compliance officer, Cheryl Reno.
A quick case history:
Code inspector Dawood "Sal" Haq, was out driving in his area where my house is located. My back yard is surrounded by an 8ft privacy fence. Only one person can see into the yard and that is my neighbor. The fence that separates our yards is an older 6ft fence. No one driving or walking by are able to see into the yard. Mr. Haq was curious though and pulled his truck into the non-paved alley that runs along most of my fence. He parked, got out of his truck, got into the bed and then stood on the side of the bed where he could actually see over the fence. I have checked the laws and this is LEGAL. A person is allowed to look into private property as long as they do it from a public place where anyone has a right to be.
However... For a code inspector to go through the trouble Mr. Haq did in order to see in the yard, they need to have a REASON to look. Being curious is not acceptable. The only reason an inspector is able to do what he did is if someone made a complaint.
In my case.... There was no complaint. I knew it and I questioned it.

As the situation continued and the citations piled up, I called the inspector out. I had to file a request for public information in order to prove there was no complaint. The city will see there is no complaint and have the tickets dismissed. That is what SHOULD have happened.
Instead, the city released a few emails to and from Inspector Haq and one of them contained the so-called "complaint."
It was part of the email. Meaning it wasn't a separate document as a complaint made by the public to code compliance should be. This is exactly what Inspector Haq's email said to his (apparent) supervisor on May 18, 2017 at 2:24 PM....

Os,I received this complaint but there is an 8ft privacy fence. I have to stand on the truck to look over the fence. Do I open a case for this? The complaint is valid. 

eAssist#2647565Resident has a ton of junk in the backyard, tires and tons and tons of other stuff, that is causing the area to be infested with rats, mosquitos and all kinds of insects. please come out and check and have them remove it.

A few quick side notes: 1- On that day, Mr. Haq was NOT a licensed code enforcement officer. He had only applied for his Trainers certificate at that point. He was not authorized to conduct code enforcement activity as the State of Texas requires. 2- I have a LARGE yard. Even IF it was my neighbor who made the complaint (which I doubt very much because, we get along rather well), how would ANYONE not standing IN the yard be able to see "mosquitos and all kinds of insects"??? There is simply no way anyone would be able to make that claim honestly in a complaint.

The inspector was faced with being caught for misconduct by wrongfully invading someones privacy. An honorable person would say they were wrong and accept responsibility for their actions. Surely, an employee working for the city would do that, right?
Not Inspector Haq.
When he was called out for his actions, he lied. He said that he was responding to a complaint.
I know Haq lied and there was no complaint based off of the first warning letter he sent that same day.

This is exactly what the first paragraph of the warning letter said...

On 5/18/2017, an inspection was conducted in the area in which you live, manage or own a property. The following violations of the City Of Garland Code of Ordinances were noted at the property identified as:

That is a basic letter code enforcement sends out when they see a violation while scanning the neighborhood. If there is a complaint... The letter states there was a complaint.
Mr. Haq lied and tried to cover his mistake but, in doing so... he was sloppy and it was easy to find proof that he was trying to cover up his wrongdoing but, only made it worse.

Fast forward to October, 2017 when I appeared in court for a pretrial hearing. I had filed a motion for discovery. I requested all information available regarding my case and that included all emails sent by anyone in code compliance about my case.

One of the emails included in what I was given to me from the discovery motion being granted was from Cheryl Reno to Inspector Haq.
Side note: Cheryl Reno is a code officer who served me with a search warrant to abate a public nuisance on July 14, 2017. See other posts for details.
Officer Reno sent Haq an email on the same day that the warrant was executed, July 14, 2017.
The email informed Mr. Haq that she took lots of pics for him and there were plenty of things he could use to issue new citations.
The content of the email is not what caught my attention. What caught my attention was what her identification and contact information said. The email showed the following:

Cheryl RenoInspector/SpecialistCode Compliance Department

What is wrong with that? Well.... Here is what is wrong with that:

After the warrant was executed in July, I began documenting everything I could find regarding code enforcement in Garland. I took screen shots of the code compliance departments pages on the Garland City website. I will scan that page and post it here soon.
In July of 2017, the "Contact Us" page showed the following:

Housing Standards DivisionCheryl Reno, Code Inspector

I took a screen shot of the same "Contact Us" page on November 10, 2017 and this is exactly what it shows under:

Single Family InspectorsCheryl Reno, Inspector Specialist

Allow me to summarize...

On July 14, 2017, the day the email was sent, Cheryl Reno was a code inspector listed under Housing Standards Division.
HOWEVER, her email identification sent that same day showed her title as, Inspector/Specialist.

On July 14, 2017, Cheryl Reno was NOT an Inspector/Specialist. She did not get that title until AFTER that day. The website did not update the title information showing her as Inspector/Specialist until September 2017.

It is therefore a fact that Cheryl Reno fabricated and/or falsified that email that was included in the disclosure for the discovery packet. When the city attorney went to code compliance and told them to release emails regarding my case, Cheryl Reno complied by submitting an email she said she wrote on July 14, 2017 BUT, she messed up when she didn't change her title back to what it was on that date. Meaning, she wrote the email AFTER she got her new title. Either way, Cheryl Reno is a licensed Code Compliance Officer in the State Of Texas and she lied while working in her official capacity in an attempt to conceal wrongdoing by her and her department.

As I stated before, information like this will never become public record because, the city will not let a person take their case to a point where it will be heard in a court of law.
This is PROOF of a public official who has LIED and her actions has caused a resident to suffer as a result.
In addition to posting the information on this Blog, I will be soon be filing an official complaint against Cheryl Reno, Code Compliance Officer with the City of Garland as well as with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation (TDLR). I am somewhat satisfied to know that at least the TDLR WILL investigate the matter and they WILL hold those who were involved in my case accountable for their wrongdoing.