Danny Demon Austin v. State
10-13-00119-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 10, 2015Background
- Appellant Danny Demon Austin was convicted of possession of a controlled substance (<1 gram) in a drug-free zone and sentenced to 16 years.
- Original indictment charged possession of cocaine within 1,000 feet of Little Angels Daycare; State moved to amend to methamphetamine and later to change the location to the Boys & Girls Club of Navarro County.
- The trial court granted both motions to amend; the record contains the State’s proposed amended indictment and a hearing transcript showing the second amendment was granted over Austin’s objection.
- At arrest, officers seized a cigarette box from Austin containing baggies; testing showed a trace amount of methamphetamine.
- Witnesses identified the Boys & Girls Club and testified Austin possessed the methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of that facility.
- On remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals, this Court reviewed (1) whether the second indictment amendment was proper and (2) sufficiency of the evidence under the amended indictment; the motion-to-suppress issue was upheld on prior analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Austin's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the second indictment was properly amended to change the listed location from Little Angels Daycare to Boys & Girls Club | Amendment was invalid because the record lacked a physical interlineation on the original indictment and thus violated art. 1 § 10 | Amendment complied with art. 28.10/28.11: State served proposed amended indictment, sought leave, proffered photocopy, and obtained court approval at hearing | Amendment was proper — proffered amended photocopy plus court leave satisfied amendment requirements (Riney/Perez controls) |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove unlawful possession of methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of the Boys & Girls Club | Evidence insufficient because State did not prove possession within 1,000 feet of the Boys & Girls Club as alleged in amended indictment | Officers observed, arrested Austin, seized cigarette box with baggies; lab detected trace meth; witnesses placed him within 1,000 feet of the Boys & Girls Club — cumulative circumstantial evidence supports conviction | Evidence sufficient when viewed in light most favorable to verdict; rational factfinder could infer control and knowledge and proximity to the Boys & Girls Club |
| Whether the trial court erred in denying motion to suppress (inventory/prior analysis) | Arrest required warrant; inventory exception cannot validate seizure absent proper arrest warrant documentation | Court previously analyzed and rejected Austin’s suppression argument; State stands on prior briefing | Denial of suppression affirmed on prior analysis (court adheres to original ruling) |
Key Cases Cited
- Ward v. State, 829 S.W.2d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (discusses amendment procedure and physical alteration/interlineation theory)
- Riney v. State, 28 S.W.3d 561 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (permits amendment by proffering an amended photocopy approved by the court)
- Perez v. State, 429 S.W.3d 639 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (upheld amendment where defendant had actual notice and agreed or did not object to procedural effects)
- Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (standard of review for sufficiency: Jackson standard applied)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (establishes reasonable-doubt sufficiency standard for appellate review)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (circumstantial evidence can support conviction)