Last year, Iracheta filed an appeal claiming that Judge Saucedo had erroneously nullified this specific case without having the proper jurisdiction and other required steps to properly do so.

Since then the Texas Fourth Court of Appeals rendered a memorandum opinion reversing the County Judge's ruling due to a lack of jurisdiction. 

Iracheta has since been replaced by Hernandez after an election for the position had not been called for in the November 2018 election.

Last week Iracheta took to social media to express his thoughts over the decision, which he claims cost him his job. Hernandez has since responded to Iracheta's claims in which she feels he has implicated her "in some dreamed up plot for dubious purposes, that somehow, were designed to personally affect you (Iracheta).”

Hernandez went on to question Iracheta's actions on social media, in which she states include personal attacks on a Judges decision.

“Your Facebook post asks why? (why I filed a motion to dismiss) as if I had ulterior motives and personal interest in an 18- year-old possession of marijuana misdemeanor case (POM at the misdemeanor level are less than 4 oz.) that had been closed over a decade ago,” wrote Hernandez.

Hernandez added that during her time as County Attorney, she found that as of March 2019 - when she came In - there were over 1,000 cases that had not been resolved for incidents that had mostly occurred the year of 2017.“We usually have a whole year to get them done. In 2018, the County Attorney's office had resolved less than forty percent of those 2017 cases. The deadline to be in compliance was July 31, 2019,” stated Hernandez. “Where you (Iracheta) had 16 months to comply, I was on a short 4-month deadline to go over more than 1,000 cases that had been unresolved.”

Hernandez explained that due to laws in place and issues of potential non-compliance, the county was forced to go into a time management plan. And that dealing with his appeal added strain to the 4-month deadline that was being faced from so many cases that were left pending. 

She goes on to point out other actions available but not taken by Iracheta to rectify the problem. “This is your second time you blame another party, namely the Judge, for your inaction. You are using your inaction in a way which are linking one to another one, to another one. The case of the expired term is a perfect example. You continue to say that you were “fired” from the position of County Attorney. Let me clarify you were not hired and you were not fired; you were appointed to a position that was left vacant. When you failed to register to be placed on the ballot so you could continue to serve in that capacity it was left vacant by operation of law (default), and you blamed the Judge for not putting you on the ballot,” added Hernandez. Hernandez continues by pointing out certain claims and actions that occurred throughout the whole issue which she claims involved Iracheta and acting District Attorney Roberto Serna.

The issue between both Attorneys could lead to a hotly debated and dragged out County Attorney race as the position is up for election next year.