It hit the floor Tuesday, July 14, 2026, when Allen (A.J.) Self, Ann Stimmel, David Chase and Dean Lackey filed a 202 petition to investigate possible fraudulent claims that led to grand jury indictments on December 19, 2024 for theft of currency by deception.
After 18 months of accusations without actual evidence, the indictments were dismissed for lack of probable cause.
A Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 202 hearing allows potential plaintiffs to investigate claims or preserve testimony before filing a lawsuit.
The petition filed by Self, Stimmel, Chase and Lackey states that the investigation was conducted by former Fannin County Criminal District Attorney Richard Glaser --- Glaser would conspicuously retire on December 31, 2024, 12 days after the indictments were handed down -- and Fannin County Judge Newt Cunningham.
The petition goes on to say that Glaser and Cunningham initiated the investigation without the involvement of police or the Fannin County Sheriff's Office and, despite 18 months of slanderous accusations in Fannin County Commissioners Court that spawned a local gossip fest, no offense report or prosecution report was ever created.
However, the individuals under indictment endured a year and a half of intense scrutiny, including testimony by Self, Stimmel and Chase under oath at Rule 202 hearings and Lackey was subpoenaed to testify under oath in front of the grand jury.
Now the shoe is on the other foot.
Glaser and Cunningham will likely be compelled to testify under oath in the next set of 202 hearings. The petitioners are also permitted to depose any Fannin County employee who potentially has relevant information.
Where is this headed
After the 202 process plays out, it would appear that the end result may eventually be a federal lawsuit against Glaser, Cunningham and Fannin County for malicious prosecution. At the heart of the matter are the accusations made by Glaser and Cunningham in front of a grand jury. A malicious prosecution would require proof that arrests were made without probable cause and with malice, and grand jury testimony would be the primary source of evidence necessary to prove those two components.
Although grand jury testimony is generally sealed and confidential, in civil law, disclosure of grand jury testimony can be ruled to be proper if a particularized need can be established.
In this case, since no arrest report or prosecution report is available, the grand jury testimony is the sole source of evidence necessary to determine if representatives of the county intentionally presented false information that resulted in criminal charges.
In addition, the transcript will provide insight into just how much the grand jury may have been misled by either Glaser or Cunningham.
