|
By
Robert O. Dawson
Bryant Smith Chair in Law
University of Texas School of Law
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.
Juvenile
court did not abuse its discretion in transferring juvenile sex offender to TDCJ
despite lack of sex offender treatment [In re D.T.] (04-1-15).
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.
Unadjudicated
juvenile offenses are admissible at the penalty phase of a criminal trial
[Dawson v. State] (04-1-13).
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.
In
modification proceedings, the juvenile court considered the full range of
options before committing the juvenile to the TYC [In re C.S.C.]
(04-1-12).
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.
Requirement
of DNA sample as probation condition is constitutional; applies to probationers
with excused registration [In re D.L.C.] (04-1-11).
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.
Court of
Appeals applies criminal factual sufficiency standard to review adjudication [In
re A.L.L.] (04-1-10).
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.
Claim
that State must allege prior misdemeanor adjudications to support TYC commitment
not preserved for appeal [In re M.D.H.] (04-1-09).
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.
Attorney
General says that child referred for contempt of JP court may be detained if
criteria warrant, but not placed in secure post-adjudication facility [No.
GA-0131] (04-1-08).
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.
Juvenile
court lost jurisdiction to revoke probation when respondent became 18 [In re A.B.] (04-1-05).
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.
Failure
to defense attorney to subpoena alibi witness to adjudication hearing was
ineffective assistance of counsel [In re I.R.] (04-1-04).
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.
Evidence
sufficient to prove intent to arouse or gratify element of indecency with a
child [In re D.B.] (04-1-03).
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.
Attorney
General says unemancipated 17-year-old child is not a missing child when parents
know the child's whereabouts [GA-0125] (04-1-01).
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.
The Court
of Appeals exhaustively reviewed the appellate record for errors when counsel
filed an Anders brief [In re A.C.R.] (03-4-23).
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.
Juvenile
did not prove a causal connection between the failure to notify parents of his
arrest and his confession [Gonzales v. State] (03-4-22).
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.
Burden on
juvenile respondent to show causal connection between failure to notify parents
and confession [Pham v. State] (03-4-21).
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.
Counsel
not ineffective in criminal trial in failing to object to juvenile record when
defendant opened the door by his testimony [Andrews v. State] (03-4-20).
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.
Requiring
juvenile to remove shoes to enter alternative learning center was a valid search
[In re O.E.] (03-4-19).
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.
Error not
to require unanimous verdict on at least one of four theories charged in
petition [In re M.P.] (03-4-17).
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.
Court of
Appeals requires three misdemeanor adjudications to authorize TYC commitment on
misdemeanor probation revocation [In re J.W.] (03-4-15).
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.
Prior
attempts at community placement and lack of parental supervision justify TYC
commitment [In re T.A.] (03-4-14).
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.
Cannot
revoke probation for failure to pay restitution without proof the failure was
willful; respondent did not violate probation by leaving placement [In re J.M.,
III] (03-4-12).
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.
Probation
revoked for failure to attend school; claim of parental coercion not proved [In
re P.Z.] (03-4-11)
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.
Court of
Appeals applies Code of Criminal Procedure article 4.18 to a claim of an error
in certification proceedings [Allen v. State] (03-4-10)
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.
Sufficient
evidence to support modification to permit placement for 18 months [In re D.A.G.] (03-4-09)
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.
Removal
from home findings in disposition proceedings supported by evidence in
commitment of Canadian national to TYC [In re J.B.D.] (03-4-07)
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.
Capital
murder statement was admissible because the juvenile was not in custody; the
statement was not involuntary under the due process standard [Martinez v. State]
(03-4-06).
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.
Insufficient
evidence baseball bat was used as a deadly weapon in aggravated assault by
threat case [In re S.B.] (03-4-04).
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.
Error to
enhance criminal sentence with pre-1996 adjudication; juvenile opened door in
criminal trial to bad act testimony [Franklin v. State] (03-4-03).
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.
Commitment
to TYC for aggravated assault by threat upheld under discretion abuse review of
removal from home findings [In re D.U.] (03-4-01).
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.
Evidence
was factually sufficient to support indecency adjudication; juvenile's statement
to police was not involuntary [In re Z.L.B.] (03-3-29).
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.
Juvenile
court was not required to initiate fitness inquiry without motion; evidence
sufficient to support removal from home [In re J.K.N.] (03-3-28).
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.
Evidence
was legally and factually sufficient to support a TYC commitment of a Mexican
national [In re G.M.] (03-3-27).
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.
Ineffective
assistance is not a jurisdictional claim in a criminal appeal following
certification [Rodriguez v. State] (03-3-26).
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.
Failure
of record to show adjudication petition was served on juvenile requires reversal
[In re M.D.R.] (03-3-25).
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.
Mother's
failure to take child to placement facility is hindering apprehension of
delinquent child [Mitz v. State] (03-3-24).
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.
Failure
to assert mental illness defense at revocation hearing not ineffective
assistance of counsel [In re T.T.G.] (03-3-23).
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.
Not
ineffective assistance for counsel in criminal case to fail to challenge
confession made by his 14 year old client [Charles v. State] (03-3-22).
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.
Attendance
officer and probation officer may reference records while testifying in
modification hearing [In re J.G.] (03-3-21).
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.
Interlocutory
appeal of certification does not abate criminal prosecution [Ex parte Venegas]
(03-3-20).
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.
Evidence
sufficient to support adjudication for being party to delivery of a controlled
substance [In re D.W.A.] (03-3-19).
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.
It was
not ineffective assistance of counsel in criminal proceedings to fail to move to
suppress a confession by a 14 year old who claimed to be high on marijuana
[Charles v. State] (03-3-17).
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.
Evidence
was sufficient to support criminal trespass by failing to depart adjudication
[In re M.A.F.] (03-3-16).
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.
Evidence
sufficient for aggravated sexual assault of a child; medical diagnosis hearsay
exception issue discussed but not decided [In re Y.H.] (03-3-15).
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.
Removal
from home findings sufficient for TYC commitment for assault with bodily injury
[In re R.R.] (03-3-14).
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.
Proof of
value in criminal mischief case insufficient; proof of resisting arrest
insufficient because respondent already under arrest [In re M.C.L.]
(03-3-13).
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.
Sufficient
evidence of prior felony adjudication to authorize TYC commitment for a
misdemeanor [In re J.H.] (03-3-12).
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.
There was
insufficient evidence that a knife was a deadly weapon in an aggravated robbery
trial [In re J.A.W.] (03-3-11).
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.
Juvenile
court not required to admonish as to deportation consequences of adjudication
[In re R.F.] (03-3-10).
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.
Unobjected
to error in jury charge to be measured by civil, not criminal, standards [In re
A.A.B.] (03-3-08).
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.
Criminal
court cannot enhance punishment with juvenile adjudication for state jail felony
[Fortier v. State] (03-3-07).
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.
Assault
on public servant petition was not fatal in face of motion for failure to allege
how the victim was a public servant [In re F.C.] (03-3-06).
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.
Not error
to refuse to permit defendant to question witness about juvenile record [Esparza
v. State] (03-3-05).
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.
Evidence
in modification hearing supported juvenile court's commitment to TYC [In re
E.R.L.] (03-3-04).
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.
Juvenile
court did not abuse its discretion in committing a probation violator to the TYC
[In re K.B.] (03-3-03).
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.
Failure
in criminal trial to file written pre-trial motion objecting to jurisdiction
waives respondent's claim of juvenility; failure to file not ineffective
assistance [Marquez v. State] (03-3-01).
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.
Evidence
sufficient to show respondent knowingly possessed marijuana found in his shoe
[In re J.H.] (03-2-40).
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.
Court of
Appeals approves of statement admissibility on parental notice issue [Hampton v.
State] (03-2-39).
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.
Evidence
was sufficient for aggravated assault by firearm; not error to exclude evidence
of pending arrest warrant against witness [In re S.D.C.] (03-2-38).
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.
An
anonymous tip did not provide reasonable suspicion for a stop and frisk by a
school resource officer [In re A.T.H.] (03-2-37).
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.
Not
ineffective assistance for counsel to fail to object to extraneous offenses or
to request a limiting instruction [In re Y.R.C.] (03-2-36).
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.
Trial
court reset modification hearing without ruling on motion; post-termination
modification of probation valid [In re P.L.] (03-2-35).
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.
The
evidence was sufficient to support commitment to TYC for indecency with a child
[In re E.J.L.] (03-2-34).
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.
A birth
certificate not admitted into evidence in criminal proceedings is not proof
defendant was a juvenile at the time of the offenses [Ramirez v. State]
(03-2-32).
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.
Constitutional,
not criminal, habeas corpus is appropriate to challenge confinement in TDCJ
under the determinate sentence act [Ex parte Valle] (03-2-31).
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.
Juvenile
felony adjudication does not later make a criminal defendant ineligible to
receive community supervision from the jury [Malpica v. State] (03-2-30).
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.
Due
process was not violated in denying a continuance at disposition to obtain
testimony of respondent's doctor [In re J.H.C.] (03-2-27).
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.
Appeal
challenging 30 day confinement as probation condition is moot because the term
has already been served [In re J.P.D.] (02-3-26).
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.
Evidence
was sufficient to support certification for intoxication manslaughter because of
inadequate time for juvenile probation [Faisst v. State] (03-2-25).
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.
The Tyler
Court of Appeals finds that a delay in notifying parents of arrest invalidated
confession under causal connection rule [State v. Simpson] (03-2-24).
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.
Probation
officer's testimony proves one prior misdemeanor; respondent's admission proves
the other; misdemeanor revocation with TYC commitment authorized [In re C.E.R.]
(03-2-23).
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 .
Beaumont
Court of Appeals says that parent and child must both desire to appeal for one
to be filed [In re A.M.M.] (03-2-22).
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.
Attorney
General says that local government may broadcast information about registered
sex offenders on local cable channel [No. GA-0056] (03-2-21).
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.
Certified
juvenile is entitled to credit on prison sentence for time spent in juvenile
detention [Ex parte Brown] (03-2-20).
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.
Findings
that probation was violated was a sufficient statement of reasons for revoking
probation [In re S.M.] (03-2-19).
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.
Habeas
corpus cannot be used as an appeal substitute, here to challenge probation
revocation [In re K.T.] (03-2-17).
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.
Refusal
of respondent to undergo mental examinations does not invalidate certification
[Montgomery v. State] (03-2-16).
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.
Not
ineffective assistance for counsel not to question at disposition statements
made in report [In re R.D.B.] (03-2-15).
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.
Appellate
counsel files Anders brief; judgment modified to require placement of thumbprint
on judgment [In re R.W.G.] (03-2-14).
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.
Evidence
sufficient to support adjudication for delivery of controlled substance [In re
O.J.H.] (03-2-13).
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.
Insurance
company has duty to defend youth facility in wrongful death lawsuit [Progressive
Youth Services v. Dallas Fire Insurance Co.] (03-2-11).
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.
Appeal
dismissed in plea bargained case because written stipulation was not a pretrial
motion under the appeal statute [In re B.N.C.] (03-2-09).
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.
No
factual support for juvenile court's statement of reasons for revoking probation
[In re A.R.D.] (03-2-08).
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.
Texas
Supremes say respondent must prove outcry witness was not the first to be told
about sexual offenses [In re Z.L.B.] (03-2-07).
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.
The
juvenile court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate for an offense not alleged in
the petition nor included in the offense that was alleged [In re D.D.]
(03-2-6).
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.
It was
ineffective assistance, but not prejudicial, for defense counsel to elicit at
punishment pre-1996 juvenile adjudication [Chapa v. State] (03-2-05).
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.
San
Antonio Court of Appeals says only abuse of discretion review standard should
apply to appellate review of juvenile court disposition decisions [In re K.T.]
(03-2-04).
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.
Guardian
ad litem was not required to be present at a hearing in which respondent's
mother was present [In re W.D.M.] (03-2-03).
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.
It was
not error for juvenile court to start release/transfer hearing before 60 day
deadline, but to complete it after the deadline [In re K.H.] (03-2-02).
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.
Evidence
is sufficient to support a burglary adjudication; it was not ineffective
assistance for counsel not to object to hearsay [In re M.R.] (03-2-01).
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.
Admission
of oral custodial statement in theft case was harmless in light of evidence of
possession of recently stolen property [In re C.R.] (03-1-31).
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.
Not error
to permit juvenile probation officer to testify at penalty phase of criminal
proceedings as to defendant's behavior while on juvenile probation [Lindsay v.
State] (03-1-30).
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.
Allegation
in petition that offenses were committed when respondent was 17 does not deprive
juvenile court of jurisdiction [Martinez v. State] (03-1-29).
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.
Appeal
waiver before juvenile court by respondent and attorney accepted by appellate
court [In re B.K.M.] (03-1-28).
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.
Certified
juvenile may challenge juvenile court transfer after open plea in criminal court
[Faisst v. State] (03-1-27).
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.
Okay for
juvenile probation officer to testify at penalty though not on witness list;
defendant should have anticipated JPO testimony [Hutchings v. State]
(03-1-26).
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.
Juvenile
court did not err in committing juvenile with an attitude to TYC for burglary
[In re J.J.N.] (03-1-25).
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.
Attorney
general says juvenile court may order child or parent to reimburse county for
cost of service of summons [AG No. GA-0017] (03-1-24).
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.
Home
removal findings for TYC commitment factually sufficient despite probation
officer's recommendation [In re C.R.H.] (03-1-23).
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.
Failure
to make parental notification claim before juvenile court waives it in attack on
a confession [Lopez v. State] (03-1-22).
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.
To revoke
probation, association violation requires proof juvenile knew of other's
probation status; school records are admissible as public records [In re B.J.]
(03-1-20).
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.
Okay for
TYC to give judge in release/transfer hearing under determinate sentence act
letters from juvenile; gatekeeper finding not required for expert testimony [In
re C.D.T., III] (03-1-19).
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.
Texas judge was under a duty to honor an Arizona
request under the Interstate Compact on Juveniles for return of a runaway [In re
State of Texas] (03-1-18).
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.
Statement of reasons and removal from home
findings upheld in TYC commitment [In re J.P.R.] (03-1-17).
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.
Removal from home findings upheld for sex offense
committed in a homeless shelter [In re J.R.] (03-1-16).
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.
|
