Bowen, Deborah
2012 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 817
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2012Background
- This is an intermediate Texas criminal case addressing lesser-included offenses and judgment reform.
- Appellant was charged with misapplication of fiduciary property valued at $200,000 or more, under Tex. Penal Code § 32.45.
- The Eastland Court of Appeals overturned based on Bowen v. State, concluding the evidence showed approximately $103,344, not $200,000, and acquitted under Collier doctrine.
- The Supreme Court overruled Collier, holding the judgment should be reformed to reflect a second-degree felony conviction instead of acquittal.
- The decision discusses whether Collier’s “overreaching” rationale is workable and whether the State or defense strategy affects trial court duties.
- The Court remands for reformation of the conviction to reflect misapplication of fiduciary property in the second degree and a new punishment hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Collier v. State should be overruled. | Bowen argued Collier is unworkable. | Appellant urged adherence to Collier. | Collier overruled. |
| Whether a lesser-included offense instruction must be requested or submitted to permit reform. | State/defendant strategic choices do not require sua sponte instructions. | Lesser-included instructions may be ignored if not requested. | Rule over Collier refined; reform allowed when appropriate. |
| Whether the evidence supports a second-degree felony conviction after reform. | Evidence supports misapplication of fiduciary property in excess of $100,000. | Value misapplied was only about $103,344; justify second-degree felony. | Conviction reformed to second degree; punishment hearing remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Collier v. State, 999 S.W.2d 779 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (overruled; appellate reform of judgments for lesser offenses not allowed absent proper submission/request)
- Haynes v. State, 273 S.W.3d 183 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (discussed as controlling on Collier’s reach and stare decisis concerns)
- Tolbert v. State, 306 S.W.3d 776 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) (defensive issues and trial strategy; no sua sponte obligation to submit lesser offenses)
- Flores v. State, 245 S.W.3d 432 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (discussion of Royster-Rousseau test and submission of lesser offenses)
- Arevalo v. State, 943 S.W.2d 887 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (second prong of Royster-Rousseau test applied to requests; impact on submission)
- Grey v. State, 298 S.W.3d 644 (Tex.Crim.App.2009) (application of Arevalo to aggravating elements and defenses)
- Arevalo v. State, 943 S.W.2d 887 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (Royster-Rousseau two-prong test for lesser-included offenses)
- Shipp v. State, 331 S.W.3d 433 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (considered but not controlling on Collier overruled context)
- Tucker v. State, 274 S.W.3d 688 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (state urged overruling Collier; treated in discussion)
- Miles v. State, 357 S.W.3d 629 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (cited in post Haynes discussion)