Dekeimus Jones v. State
437 S.W.3d 536
Tex. App.2014Background
- Jones was charged with stealing a purse in a Walmart parking lot on September 29, 2012.
- Jones pled guilty in open court and was sentenced to 22 months in a state jail facility.
- Jones moved for a new trial alleging the State failed to obtain and preserve a parking-lot video of the incident.
- The trial court denied the motion for new trial; the issue on appeal is whether the denial was an abuse of discretion.
- Evidence at the motion hearing showed the State’s discovery form indicated a video existed, but the clerk testified no video was in fact held, and Walmart reportedly preserves footage for 30 days.
- The court held the State did not act in bad faith and thus there was no due-process violation; the denial of the motion for new trial was not an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of the motion for new trial was an abuse of discretion. | Jones argues the State’s failure to preserve video violated due course of law. | State’s actions did not amount to bad faith or prejudice warranting reversal. | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed. |
| Whether Texas Due Course of Law provides greater protection than the federal due process for preservation of evidence. | Texas due course standard is broader; negligence may suffice to trigger relief. | Texas provides no greater protection; bad-faith standard governs preservation. | Texas follows bad-faith standard; no violation here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Okonkwo v. State, 398 S.W.3d 689 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (abuse-of-discretion review for new-trial motions)
- Rodriguez v. State, 191 S.W.3d 428 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006) (de novo review on questions of law and mixed questions not requiring credibility)
- Pena v. State, 226 S.W.3d 634 (Tex. App.—Waco 2007) (previous negligence standard on preservation later superseded)
- State v. Vasquez, 230 S.W.3d 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007) (due-course-of-law and preservation protections discussed)
- Jackson v. State, 50 S.W.3d 579 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001) (requirement of bad faith for destruction of potentially useful evidence)
- Rudd v. State, 871 S.W.2d 530 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994) (preservation of potentially useful evidence and related standards)
- Saldana v. State, 783 S.W.2d 22 (Tex. App.—Austin 1990) (preservation of evidence standards)