Craig Anthony Gilder v. State
469 S.W.3d 636
Tex. App.2015Background
- Craig Anthony Gilder, a registered sex offender (convicted 1988), was required to register annually under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 62.102.
- Gilder had registered 7601 Curry Rd., Apt. No. 2 on July 24, 2012; a compliance check on May 14, 2013 found that unit vacant and the complex under renovation.
- Apartment manager testified Gilder was never a lawful resident; his mother had lived in No. 2 but relocation and a trespass warning occurred when Gilder stayed beyond permitted guest time.
- Gilder was charged only with intentionally and knowingly failing to report an intended change of address at least seven days before the intended move date, as required by art. 62.055(a).
- The jury convicted Gilder of failure to comply with sex-offender registration and sentenced him to seven years’ confinement; Gilder appealed arguing insufficient evidence of intent to move.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Gilder intentionally or knowingly failed to report an intended change of address under art. 62.055(a) | State: vacancy of registered unit as of Jan 3, 2013 and other circumstantial facts allow jury to infer Gilder intended to move and failed to report by the 7-day deadline | Gilder: State failed to prove he intended to change address (no evidence of a known new address or conscious objective to move) | Court: Affirmed — under Thomas, evidence that Gilder was living at a new address as of Jan 3, 2013 permitted a reasonable inference he intended to change address and failed to timely report |
Key Cases Cited
- Salinas v. State, 163 S.W.3d 734 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (standard for reviewing legal sufficiency)
- Sorrells v. State, 343 S.W.3d 152 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (circumstantial evidence can establish guilt)
- Thomas v. State, 444 S.W.3d 4 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (evidence a defendant was living at a new address supports inference of intended move for art. 62.055(a))
- Green v. State, 350 S.W.3d 617 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011) (contrasting view on inference of intent to move; later limited by Thomas)
- Lane v. State, 763 S.W.2d 785 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (culpable mental states typically proven by inference from circumstances)