Austin Shiloh Harper v. State
13-15-00548-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 16, 2017Background
- Harper, chief of the Waelder Police Department, was indicted and convicted of theft by a public servant for using donated money to buy two handguns and receiving a three-year probated sentence.
- Donor (Hometown Sweepstakes) initially offered two checks in Dec 2013; the City administrator rejected that donation.
- In May 2014 Assistant Chief Moore solicited and received two blank money orders totaling $1,253; Moore cashed them and split the cash with Harper (Harper’s share ≈ $650). Ranger Evans surveilled the transfer.
- Harper purchased two handguns the next day, billed to him personally, completed ATF form 4473, and paid cash (used ≈ $200 of his own money in addition to donation). No City purchase order or prior City approval for the firearms purchase.
- Harper did not inform the City about the donation or the purchase until after a Texas Ranger questioned him; he initially disclaimed knowledge but later admitted using the donation to buy the guns for what he characterized as City property.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the donation was "owned" by the City | City: donation is City property because received/solicited by assistant chief acting for the City | Harper: City had rejected the donation earlier; Moore personally received it so Harper could have superior possessory right | Jury reasonably found City owned or had superior right; conviction upheld |
| Whether Harper "unlawfully appropriated" the funds | City: Harper used donated funds without City consent to buy guns for himself | Harper: no City policy governed donated funds so he did not need consent | Jury could reasonably infer lack of City consent given concealment and City receipts practice; issue decided for State |
| Whether Harper intended to deprive the City | City: Harper concealed purchase, filled ATF form claiming personal ownership, and would have claimed guns as his absent investigation | Harper: he did not solicit donation and thus lacked intent to deprive | Jury could infer intent to permanently withhold property; held against Harper |
| Sufficiency of the evidence (overall) | State: combined evidence supports elements beyond a reasonable doubt | Harper: evidence legally insufficient on ownership, unlawfulness, and intent | Court reviews under Jackson standard and affirms conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Gross v. State, 380 S.W.3d 181 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (stating standard for legal-sufficiency review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (establishing the constitutional standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (deference to jury to resolve conflicts and draw inferences)