Cinque Ross v. State, 06-14-00157-CR

Background

Defendant Cinque Ross was charged with felony possession of a firearm by a felon after police executed a search warrant at his home and seized four pistols from his bedroom closet. He was tried in a bench trial, found guilty, and sentenced to 8 years' imprisonment.
On Feb 14, 2014 Ross signed jury-waiver forms as part of a plea negotiation involving a separate drug information; the plea later was canceled when the parties learned the lab report did not support a felony drug charge.
Ross attempted to withdraw his waiver before trial, asserting he misunderstood the waiver and was under emotional distress; the trial court refused and proceeded to a bench trial.
Police recorded a custodial interview in which Ross made inculpatory statements; Ross contends the interview began with off-the-record promises by Officer Chitwood that "if you admit, I can help you," inducing the statements.
Ross moved to suppress the recorded statement and to suppress evidence from the search warrant, arguing (1) the interrogation was involuntary due to improper inducements, and (2) the warrant affidavit relied on an unreliable confidential informant and lacked probable cause. The trial court overruled objections and admitted the video, the weapons, and related evidence.
Ross also asserted an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to Tex. Penal Code § 46.04(a)(1), arguing a felon retains a right to possess firearms in his home for self-defense under Heller and McDonald; the trial court rejected constitutional objections.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Ross)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held (trial-court rulings preserved on appeal)
1) Withdrawal of jury waiver	Waiver was involuntary/made under mutual mistake: Ross signed it as part of a plea tied to a drug case that later proved not to be a felony; he should be allowed to withdraw because no record showed prejudice or disruption	Waiver was valid, knowing, and voluntary; Ross cannot unfetteredly reassert jury right and court found no basis to rescind waiver	Trial court found the written waiver valid and refused to permit withdrawal; bench trial proceeded
2) Suppression of custodial statement (video)	Statements were induced by promises/off-the-record quid pro quo from Officer Chitwood ("help you if you admit"); Miranda/Art. 38.22 protections violated and confession was involuntary	Warnings were given and video was recorded; statements are admissible and reliable	Trial court admitted the video statement into evidence
3) Suppression of search-warrant evidence	Affidavit relied on a confidential informant whose reliability/particularity was insufficient; affidavit statements were conclusory and did not establish probable cause within the four corners	Affidavit and CI established probable cause; warrant issuance was proper	Trial court received the warrant and admitted search-derived evidence over objections
4) As-applied Second Amendment challenge to § 46.04(a)(1)	McDonald and Heller protect an individual's right to possess a firearm in the home for self-defense; applying § 46.04(a)(1) to Ross (in-home possession years after supervision) unconstitutionally burdens that right as-applied	State relies on the statutory prohibition on felons possessing firearms and legislative authority to regulate possession by felons; the statute permits limited exceptions and has long-standing validity	Trial court overruled Second Amendment objection and convicted Ross under § 46.04(a)(1)

Key Cases Cited

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognized an individual right to possess firearms for self-defense in the home)
McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (held Second Amendment rights are incorporated against the states via the Fourteenth Amendment)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (established custodial interrogation warnings and voluntariness standards)
Wolfe v. State, 917 S.W.2d 270 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (framework for determining voluntariness and admissibility of statements)
Creager v. State, 952 S.W.2d 852 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (promise-induced confessions: promise must be positive, authorized, and sufficiently influential to cause untruthful statements)
Hobbs v. State, 298 S.W.3d 193 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (defendant’s right to withdraw a jury waiver examined and limited)
Williams v. Glash, 789 S.W.2d 261 (Tex. 1990) (doctrine of mutual mistake in contract/release context used analogically to challenge voluntariness of waiver)
Holmes v. State, 323 S.W.3d 163 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (harmless-error analysis for admitting potentially improper evidence)
Rios v. State, 901 S.W.2d 704 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1995) (search-warrant and Fourth Amendment principles)