Crider v. State
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1594
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2011Background
- Crider was convicted of driving while intoxicated after a blood-search warrant was issued following an arrest for DWI.
- Affidavit alleged stop and observed intoxication on June 6, 2008; magistrate issued warrant at 1:07 a.m. on June 7.
- Defense challenged whether the affidavit showed recent probable cause due to lack of time-of-stop information.
- Court of Appeals held the affidavit's four-corners timeline showed probable cause despite uncertainty about exact timing.
- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, holding the affidavit did not establish probable cause due to a 25-hour potential gap between stop and warrant issuance and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop time must be stated to establish probable cause | Crider claimed lack of stop time renders stale probable cause | State contends timing can be inferred from surrounding facts | No; timing gaps must be supported by facts; four-corners alone insufficient for staleness view |
| Whether the affidavit's four-corners show contemporaneity between stop and warrant issuance | Crider argues no uninterrupted sequence of events is shown | State argues there was an unbroken course of events implied by context | Insufficient; no facts showing a short time frame between stop and warrant issuance |
| Whether probable cause could be established by evidence of intoxication short of specific BAC level | Crider argues need explicit BAC timing; arrest indicators suffice | State may rely on evidence of intoxication (not necessarily BAC 0.08) | Affidavit did not show sufficient probative link within a short window; required substantial basis for probable cause |
| Whether Jordan governs staleness analysis in this blood-search context | Crider relies on Jordan’s proximity timing | State distinguishes Jordan due to longer potential gap here | Jordan controls; here the gap was too long to sustain probable cause under Jordan |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jordan, 342 S.W.3d 565 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (blood search-warrant staleness; timing critical to probable cause)
- Schmidt v. State, 659 S.W.2d 420 (Tex.Crim.App.1983) (timing of events essential to probable-cause analysis)
- Cassias v. State, 719 S.W.2d 585 (Tex.Crim.App.1986) (facts must support existence of evidence on premises at warrant issue)
- Flores v. State, 319 S.W.3d 697 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) (Gates totality-of-the-circumstances framework applied to probable cause)
- Gates v. United States, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable-cause standard and totality-of-the-circumstances)