2003 Case Summaries
2010 Summaries 2009 Summaries 2008 Summaries 2007 Summaries
2006 Summaries 2005 Summaries 2004 Summaries 2003 Summaries
2002 Summaries 2001 Summaries 2000 Summaries 1999 Summaries
Reason for TYC commitment that it will meet child's educational needs is a proposition of law, not fact [In re C.Q.] (04-1-16)
On January 15, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court's statement of reason for a TYC commitment that it would meet the child's educational needs is a proposition of law, not fact. As such there is not requirement that it be supported by evidence.
On December 31, 2003, the Waco Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in transferred a juvenile sex offender to TDCJ who was not offered sex offender treatment because he would not acknowledge responsibility for the committing offense.
Evidence was sufficient to prove possession of a short barrel shotgun [In re J.A.A.] (04-1-14).
On December 31, 2003, the Waco Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to prove that the juvenile respondent possessed a prohibited weapon that he had thrown down.
On December 31, 2003, the Waco Court of Appeals held that testimony at the penalty phase of a criminal trial by a juvenile probation officer that the criminal defendant received deferred prosecution as a juvenile is admissible as an unadjudicated juvenile offense.
On December 31, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in revoking probation and committing the juvenile to the TYC. The court considered its full range of options in the case.
On December 18, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that a retroactive requirement of a DNA sample as a condition of probation is constitutional as against an ex post factor claim and a search and seizure claim; the Court also held that the requirement applies when de-registration has been ordered.
On December 18, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that it would continue to apply the criminal factual sufficiency standard of review in delinquency cases because the State's burden of proof in such cases is beyond a reasonable doubt.
On December 18, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that the juvenile had not preserved for appeal the claim that the State must allege prior misdemeanor adjudications to support a TYC commitment upon the third misdemeanor adjudication.
On December 15, 2003, the Texas Attorney General said that a child referred to the juvenile court for contempt of a JP court may be detained if juvenile detention criteria warrant, but may not be placed in a secure post-adjudication facility. This opinion clarifies Opinion Attorney General No. JC-0454 (2000).
Court of appeals has no original habeas jurisdiction in juvenile case [In re L.L.] (04-1-07).
On December 10, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that it lacks jurisdiction in an original habeas corpus action challenging a juvenile court order of detention.
When mother signed notice of appeal she may seek dismissal of the appeal [In re R.R.J.] (04-1-06).
On December 10, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal on request of the respondent's mother when the mother had signed the original notice of appeal.
On December 5, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that under the Texas Supreme Court's opinion in N.J.A. the juvenile court lost jurisdiction over the State's motion to modify disposition when the respondent became 18 before probation was revoked.
On December 4, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that the failure of the respondent's attorney to subpoena a witness who would have testified that respondent was out of town with his family on the date of the assault was ineffective assistance of counsel.
On December 4, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals upheld an adjudication for indecency with a child over a claim that the 13-year-old respondent was intending only to be funny-not to arouse or gratify his sexual desires--when he touched two girls inappropriately.
Court of Appeals upholds TYC commitment under abuse of discretion standard [In re S.R.M.] (04-1-02)
On December 3, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals upheld a commitment to TYC under its abuse of discretion standard.
On November 25, 2003, the Texas Attorney General opined that under the missing persons statute, law enforcement authorities are not authorized to return an unemancipated 17-year-old to parents when the parents know the whereabouts of the child.
On November 26, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals exhaustively reviewed the appellate record for errors when counsel on appeal filed a brief stating that the appeal was frivolous.
On November 26, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that the juvenile respondent did not prove a causal connection between the failure of police to notify police of respondent's arrest and his later confession.
On November 26, 2003, the First District Court of Appeals, on remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals, held in an en banc opinion that the burden is on the juvenile respondent to prove a causal connection between the failure of police to notify parents of the juvenile's arrest and his confession, and that the juvenile respondent here offered no proof.
On November 20, 2003, the Eastland Court of Appeals held that defense counsel was not ineffective in failing to object to the use of a juvenile record to impeach the defendant's testimony that he had never been in trouble before.
On November 13, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals upheld a search without particularized suspicion of a student's shoe which produced marijuana as a valid administrative, school search.
No abuse of discretion in TYC commitment because of failed treatment efforts [In re R.M.] (03-4-18).
On November 5, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in committing respondent to the TYC because of failed treatment efforts for inhalant abuse.
On November 5, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court erred when it refused to require a unanimous jury verdict on at least one of four different theories of aggravated sexual assault charged in the petition.
TYC commitment upheld under abuse of discretion standard [In re R.M.] (03-4-16).
On November 15, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals upheld a TYC commitment under the abuse of discretion standard it had previously adopted.
On November 5, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals joined four other courts of appeal in holding it requires three misdemeanor adjudications to authorize TYC commitment on revocation of misdemeanor probation.
On October 30, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court's commitment to TYC was justified because of its prior efforts to rehabilitate the juvenile through community placements and because the juvenile's mother refused to cooperate with the court.
No objection to failure to prove age; out-of-court proof of age sufficient [In re J.C.M.] (03-4-13).
On October 29, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that the respondent did not object to the absence of proof of age in the adjudication proceeding as required by law and that the out-of-court proof of age was sufficient.
On October 23, 2003, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held that the State had failed to prove that the 13-year-old respondent in placement willfully failed to pay restitution and that he had absconded from his placement.
On October 20, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that the child had failed to prove that his unauthorized absences from school were solely the result of decisions made by his parents.
On October 16, 2003, the Eastland Court of Appeals misinterpreted article 4.18 to require an objection under it to preserve for appellate review a claim of an error in certification proceedings.
On October 8, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to support modification of probation to permit a secure placement of up to 18 months for a new offense probation violation.
No proof that CPS worker was not outcry witness in sexual assault case [In re C.D.G.] (03-4-08)
On October 2, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that the CPS worker who testified did so properly as an outcry witness because although the complainant had talked to her mother and to police before speaking with the CPS worker, her statements to them were merely allusions to the offense, not a comprehensive outcry.
On October 2, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals upheld the juvenile court’s removal from home findings to permit a TYC commitment in a possession of marijuana case in part because of limitations placed upon alternative dispositions by respondent’s status as a Canadian national.
On September 17, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile was not in custody when he was interrogated by police about a capital murder; after making the statement, he was returned home and arrested the next day.
Probation revocation for failure to attend school upheld [In re T.R.S.] (03-4-05).
On September 5, 2003, the Texarkana Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court was authorized to revoke probation because the juvenile failed to attend school as required by his conditions.
On August 29, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that there was insufficient evidence the respondent used a baseball bat as a deadly weapon when she threatened another student at school.
On September 3, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that it was error to enhance a criminal sentence with proof of a pre-1996 juvenile adjudication and that the defendant opened the door to testimony about bad acts by his claim of non-criminal conduct.
Single photo display of respondent did not taint eyewitness testimony [In re T.S.H.] (03-4-02).
On August 28, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that a single photo display to an eyewitness by the prosecutor before trial did not under the facts of this case so taint the in-court identification by the witness to violate due process of law.
On August 27, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals upheld the TYC commitment of a gang member for a gang-related aggravated assault by threat offense committed against an undercover police officer.
On August 15, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals, on remand from the Texas Supreme Court, held that the evidence was factually sufficient to support adjudication of a 12 year old for indecency with a child and that his statement to police was not involuntary.
On August 14, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that there was nothing in the court proceedings to have required the juvenile court on its own notice to initiate fitness to proceed inquiries.
On August 14, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence to support the removal from home findings needed to justify commitment to TYC.
On August 4, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that in a criminal appeal from a plea-bargained disposition, ineffective assistance of counsel is not a jurisdictional claim permitting an appeal.
On July 22, 2003, the Texarkana Court of Appeals held that failure of the record to show that the adjudication petition was served on the juvenile with the summons requires reversal of the adjudication without a showing of harm.
On July 17, 2003, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held that the failure of a mother to transport her son to a placement as ordered by the juvenile court was the offense of hindering apprehension of a delinquent child.
On July 16, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals held that failure to assert a mental illness defense at revocation proceedings was not ineffective assistance since respondent failed to show that the outcome probably would have been different.
On July 3, 2003, the Houston Fourteenth District Court of Appeals held that it was not ineffective assistance of counsel for a certified juvenile's criminal court defense attorney to fail to challenge the admissibility of a confession made by his 14 year old client.
On July 17, 2003, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held that an attendance officer and a probation officer were properly permitted to refer to their records while testifying at the fact finding phase of a modification hearing.
On July 16, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that under the pre-1996 law, an interlocutory appeal from a certification does not abate criminal prosecution for the offense transferred.
On July 10, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to support appellant's adjudication as a party to sale of cocaine to an undercover officer.
Evidence sufficient to support adjudication for indecency with a child [In re T.D.B.] (03-3-18).
On July 3, 2003, the Houston 14th District Court of Appeals held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the juvenile court's adjudication for indecency with a child.
On July 3, 2003, the Houston 14th District Court of Appeals held that counsel in a criminal proceeding did not render ineffective assistance in failing to move to suppress a written statement given by his client when he was 14 years old when the client claimed to have been high on marijuana at the time the statement was given.
On July 3, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that the evidence was legally sufficient to support an adjudication for criminal trespass for failing to leave a skating ring upon the demand of the security guard.
On June 25, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to support an adjudication for aggravated sexual assault of a four-year-old child; the court discussed, but did not decide, whether the four-year-old understood the importance of candor for medical diagnosis sufficiently for that exception to the hearsay rule.
On June 25, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court's removal from home findings were sufficient in a case in which the respondent had previously been committed to the TYC and was later adjudicated for an assault with bodily injury committed at school.
On June 19, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held there was insufficient evidence as to the monetary value of damages to a patrol car window and that respondent was not guilty of resisting arrest because he was already under arrest at the time of the conduct alleged to resisting.
On June 19, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that sufficient evidence of a prior felony adjudication appeared in the social history report to authorize a TYC commitment for a misdemeanor.
On June 17, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that there was insufficient evidence that a knife alleged in an aggravated robbery trial to be a deadly weapon was such a weapon in view of the absence of evidence as to its nature, length, sharpness or capacity to inflict death or serious bodily injury.
On June 17, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that because juvenile proceedings are civil, not criminal, the requirement in the Code of Criminal Procedure that the judge admonish as to deportation consequences of a conviction do not apply in juvenile proceedings.
Arrest had not already been completed when respondent resisted [In re M.H.] (03-3-09).
On June 12, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that the respondent was correctly adjudicated for resisting arrest, rejecting the argument that the arrest had already been completed when the resisting conduct occurred.
On June 11, 2003, the Waco Court of Appeals held that the civil standard of assessing harm applies to unobjected to error in a juvenile jury charge, not the criminal standard of Almanza v. State.
On June 10, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that a state jail felony juvenile adjudication cannot be used to enhance punishment under article 12.42 of the Penal Code.
On June 5, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals upheld a petition charging assault on a public servant even though it did not allege under what statutory definition of public servant the public school teacher complaining witness came.
On June 4, 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that it was not error for the trial court to deny permission to the defendant to question a state's witness about his juvenile record in view of the witness' extensive adult record admitted into evidence.
On June 5, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals upheld a juvenile court's commitment on modification to the TYC against a claim that a less restrictive alternative exists.
On June 3, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion committing respondent to the TYC despite respondent's suggestion that a less restrictive appropriate placement exists.
Search of juvenile was lawful based on consent [In re L.C.] (03-3-02).
On May 30, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that a search of a juvenile that uncovered cocaine was lawful based on the consent of the juvenile.
On May 30, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that because respondent failed to file a written pre-trial motion as required by article 4.18 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging jurisdiction on the grounds of juvenility, he waived that claim. It was not ineffective assistance under these circumstances for counsel not to have filed that motion.
On May 21, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient prove that the respondent knew the substance he had hidden in his shoe was marijuana.
On May 22, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals, on remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals, held that a tape recorded statement was admissible in evidence over a claim that police had not notified parents of the purpose of taking the child into custody.
On May 8, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals upheld an adjudication for aggravated assault over challenges for legal and factual insufficiency. It also held that it was not error for the trial court to prohibit questioning about a pending arrest warrant against a witness since there was no suggestion the warrant was likely to affect his testimony.
On May 8, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that an anonymous tip about students smoking marijuana near campus did not provide a school resource officer with reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk a person on a school parking lot. The marijuana seized by the officer should have been suppressed.
On May 8, 2003, the Houston Fourteenth District Court of Appeals held that the record did not rebut the presumption that counsel had a valid strategic reason for objecting to some, but not all, extraneous offenses and for not requesting a limiting instruction.
On May 7, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that when the judge placed respondent in a boot camp he was not ruling on a motion to modify; therefore, a later revocation on the same motion was valid. Because the State used diligence, a post-termination-of-probation revocation on a motion filed before probation expired was valid.
On May 1, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that the evidence as shown in the social history report was sufficient to support the juvenile court's decision to commit respondent to the TYC for indecency with a child.
Reasonable suspicion to frisk juvenile was provided by his nervous behavior [In re P.M.] (03-2-33).
On April 30, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that a juvenile's nervous behavior when stopped in a motor vehicle provided reasonable suspicion for the officer to frisk him for weapons.
On April 30, 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that attaching a birth certificate to a general notice of appeal was not proof that defendant was a juvenile at the time of the offense.
On April 30, 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that when a juvenile who is confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice wishes to challenge the lawfulness of his confinement, he must use constitutional habeas corpus, not the statutory procedures for post-conviction felony habeas in article 11.07 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
On April 30, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals held that while an adjudication of felony delinquency is not a criminal conviction, the error of the jury in finding it to be a conviction was not harmful in view of the 99 year sentence assessed.
State may not appeal from order of juvenile court suppressing evidence [In re F.C.] (03-2-29).
On April 30, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals held that in juvenile cases, unlike in criminal cases, the state has no right to appeal from an order suppressing evidence.
Motion for new trial necessary to appeal a factual sufficiency issue [In re E.U.M.] (03-2-28).
On April 24, 2003, the Beaumont Court of Appeals held that a motion for a new trial is necessary to preserve a factual sufficiency issue for appellate review; the court held the evidence was sufficient to support an adjudication for manslaughter.
On April 24, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals upheld the juvenile court's denial of a motion for continuance made during disposition proceedings to obtain testimony from a medical doctor who had examined respondent.
On April 24, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal challenging a 30 day confinement condition of probation for lack of home removal findings because the juvenile had already served the period of confinement. The appeal challenging only that portion of the order is therefore moot.
On April 23, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the juvenile court's conclusion that the interests of the public require certification because respondent would have been eligible for less than one year of juvenile probation.
On April 23, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals, on remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals, found that a substantial delay in notifying parents of their son's arrest for capital murder was causally related to his confessing and thus the confession was invalid under the Court of Criminal Appeals' opinion in Gonzales v. State.
On April 17, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient proof of two prior misdemeanor convictions to authorize revocation of probation granted on a third conviction and commitment to the TYC .
On April 10, 2003, the Beaumont Court of Appeals appears to have said that both parent and child must be on the record desiring appeal for a notice of appeal to be filed.
On April 7, 2003, the Attorney General opined that because sex offender registration information is public, a local government is permitted to broadcast that information on a local cable channel. This includes information about juvenile registrants.
On February 26, 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that a certified juvenile is entitled to receive credit on his prison sentence for time spent in juvenile detention before certification.
On April 2, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that findings by the juvenile court that the respondent had violated two probation conditions was a sufficient statement of reasons to advance in support of revocation of probation.
Evidence factually sufficient to support indecency adjudication [In re E.P.C.] (03-2-18).
On March 31, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that although the evidence was contradictory, it was factually sufficient to support the adjudication for indecency with a child.
On March 31, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals denied an original petition for writ of habeas corpus filed nine months after misdemeanor probation was revoked, alleging that the case was not eligible for commitment under the misdemeanor probation law. Petitioner could have taken a direct appeal from the revocation decision by filing a timely notice of appeal.
On March 28, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that the refusal of respondent, on advice of counsel, not to undergo psychiatric or psychological examination did not invalidate the certification of respondent to criminal court.
On March 27, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that it was not ineffective assistance for counsel not to question at disposition statement made about his client in reports from the therapeutic foster home where he had been placed pending disposition.
On March 27, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment while considering all of the arguable grounds of error alleged in the Anders (frivolous appeal) brief. Included in that brief was the claim that the trial judge erred in not requiring the placement of respondent's thumbprint on the judgment. The Court of Appeals accepted that claim and ordered that the thumbprint be placed on the judgment.
On March 20, 2003, the Eastland Court of Appeals held that testimony by an undercover officer and a tape recording were sufficient to prove a sale of cocaine to a cooperating individual.
Eyewitnesses corroborate accomplices' testimony in burglary trial [In re C.M.] (03-2-12).
On March 20, 2003, the Eastland Court of Appeals held that testimony of eyewitnesses that they saw the respondent exist the burglarized habitation carrying rifles was sufficient to corroborate the testimony of three accomplices to the offense.
On March 20, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that a liability insurance company had a duty to defend against a lawsuit for the wrongful death of a resident in the insured youth facility.
Evidence was sufficient to support participation in assault as a party [In re C.E.T.] (03-2-10).
On March 20, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence to support the adjudication of respondent for participating as a party in an assault by her sister on a contemporary.
On March 19, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that when the respondent got what he plea bargained for, he could not appeal without juvenile court permission or on denial of a written pretrial motion.
On March 19, 2003, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that there was no factual support for the juvenile court's statement of reasons for revoking probation. Accordingly, it set aside the TYC commitment and remanded the case for further proceedings, presumably to make a supportable statement of reasons.
On March 13, 2003, the Texas Supreme Court held that under the juvenile outcry statute the respondent bears the burden of proving that the outcry witness offered by the State was not the first person to whom the complainant told about the offense, rather than placing the burden on the State to establish that its witness was the first.
On March 13, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the respondent of terroristic threat on a petition that alleged only retaliation, since terroristic threat is not a lesser included offense of retaliation.
On March 12. 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that it was ineffective assistance of counsel for defense counsel to elicit from defendant's mother testimony about his juvenile adjudication, which would not have been admissible because it occurred before 1996. However, the testimony was not prejudicial, so the conviction is not set aside.
On March 12, 2003, the San Antonio Court of Appeals in an en banc opinion overruled one of its precedents to hold that appellate review of a juvenile court disposition should be by an abuse of discretion standard only, not by legal or factual sufficiency.
On March 6, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals held that the respondent's guardian ad litem (her aunt) was not required to appear at a hearing in which the respondent's mother (the victim of the offense charged) appeared in the absence of evidence that the mother could not assist the respondent.
On March 5, 2003, the Tyler Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court had jurisdiction to hold a release/transfer hearing under the determinate sentence act when it started the hearing before the 60 day deadline, but finished the hearing after the deadline.
On February 27, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence, including possession of stolen property, to support respondent's adjudication of burglary of a habitation, at least as a party to the offense. The court also held that it was not effective assistance for counsel not to object to hearsay in light of the court's earlier overruling of such an objection.
On February 27, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that if error it was harmless to admit the respondent's oral custodial statement into evidence in view of her being in joint possession of a recently stolen motor vehicle.
On February 27, 2003, the Houston Fourteenth Court of Appeals held that the criminal court had discretion to admit testimony of the defendant's juvenile probation officer about his conduct while on juvenile probation.
On February 20, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that an erroneous allegation in the transfer petition that aggravated robberies were committed when the respondent was 17 did not deprive the juvenile court of jurisdiction over the case.
On February 13, 2003 the Houston First District Court of Appeals accepted as valid waiver of appeal an waiver before the juvenile court by the respondent and his attorney. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal although no motion to do so had been filed.
On February 12, 2003, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that a certified juvenile may contest the jurisdiction of the criminal court by challenging the juvenile court transfer even after entering an open plea of guilty in criminal court.
On February 6, 2003, the Texarkana Court of Appeals held that a criminal defendant who had applied to the jury for community supervision should have anticipated that the State would call his juvenile probation officer to testify so it was not error to permit the testimony even though the officer's name was not on a witness list.
On February 6, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not err in committing a juvenile who displayed universal hostility to authority to the TYC for burglary of a habitation.
On January 29, 2003, the Texas Attorney General issued an opinion saying that a juvenile court may order the child and parent to reimburse the county for the costs of service of summons if the court adjudicates the child to have engaged in delinquent conduct or CINS. Parents can be ordered to pay only if the juvenile court has entered another order against them under Section 54.041.
On January 30, 2003, the Austin Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court's removal from home findings were factually sufficient for a TYC misdemeanor commitment despite the supervising probation officer's recommendation to keep the juvenile at home.
On January 23, 2003, the Houston Fourteenth District Court of Appeals held that failure of the juvenile to make a parental notification claim before the juvenile court waives that claim for appellate review.
Removal from home findings not required for probation revocation [In re J.P.] (03-1-21).
On January 23, 2003, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals held that the removal from home findings required for dispositions do not apply to modification of disposition.
On January 14, 2003, the Texarkana Court of Appeals held that the State must prove the juvenile knew the status of his associate as a probationer in order to revoke for associating with an undesirable person. The court also held that school disciplinary records are admissible as public records and need not comply with the additional requirements for business records.
On January 2, 2003, the Houston First District Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not err in receiving letters from TYC written by the juvenile even though the lawyers were not advised of them. The court also held that in a release/transfer hearing there is no need for the gatekeeper hearing and finding that would be required in a trial for expert testimony.
On January 16, 2003, the El Paso Court of Appeals in an original proceeding in mandamus ordered a Texas judge to honor an Arizona request for return of a runaway child under the Interstate Compact on Juveniles.
On January 14, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals held that the trial court's statement of reasons in support of a TYC commitment was sufficient and that the court's removal from home findings were factually sufficient.
On January 9, 2003, the Amarillo Court of Appeals upheld a TYC commitment for aggravated sexual assault against a claim based on removal from home findings.
No abuse of discretion in TYC commitment [In re K.J.N.] (03-1-15).
On January 8, 2003,the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in revoking probation and committing the juvenile to the TYC.