YEAR 2005 CASE SUMMARIES

By
The Honorable Pat Garza
Associate Judge
386th District Court
San Antonio, Texas

2005 Summaries     2004 Summaries     2003 Summaries     2002 Summaries     2001 Summaries     2000 Summaries     1999 Summaries

Service of a later amended petition is not required for the trial court to have jurisdiction when a juvenile has been properly served with the original petition. [In the Matter of K.H.](06-1-21A)

On December 14, 2006, the San Antonio Court of Appeals held that service of a later amended petition is not required for the trial court to have jurisdiction when a juvenile has been properly served with the original petition.

¶ 06-1-21A. In the Matter of K.H., No. 04-04-00924-CV, 2005 Tex.App.Lexis 10810 (Tex.App.— San Antonio, 12/14/06).

Facts: K.H. was adjudicated delinquent for committing four counts of aggravated sexual assault and one count of indecency with a child. The trial court sentenced K.H. to a determinate sentence of fifteen years.

Held: Affirmed

Opinion: In his first point of error, K.H. contends that the trial court did not have personal jurisdiction over him because he was not served with the State's first amended petition. Service of a later amended petition, however, is not required for the trial court to have jurisdiction when a juvenile has been properly served with the original petition. In re G.A.T., 16 S.W.3d 818, 823 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied); In re S.D.W., 811 S.W.2d 739, 746 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, no writ); R.X.F. v. State, 921 S.W.2d 888, 893 (Tex. App.-Waco 1996, no writ). The clerk's record contains proof that K.H. was served with summons, the original petition, and the grand jury certificate of approval.

Conclusion: Accordingly, K.H.'s first point of error is overruled.

[Other Issues Omitted]

DISCLAIMER    I    CONTACT US