Demetrus Tremaine Horton v. State
01-14-00993-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 29, 2015Background
- Horton was convicted of possession of a controlled substance (PCP) with enhanced punishment and sentenced to 25 years.
- Officers stopped Horton for a traffic violation; a strong odor of PCP was detected from the vehicle.
- Officers conducted a search after Horton was detained; PCP-dipped cigarettes were found in his sock.
- Horton moved to suppress, arguing the search was warrantless and unlawful; trial court denied relief.
- At trial, the State argued probable cause from odor allowed the search; no findings on exigent circumstances were introduced.
- Horton challenged the panel decision on panel rehearing grounds and sought en banc review to align with precedent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Burden shift after warrantless search | Horton argues panel erred by requiring specific exceptions to be argued. | Horton contends the State bears burden to prove an exception after warrantless search is shown. | Panel misapplied burden-shift; proper rule: State must prove an exception. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Trial counsel failed to preserve error and challenge probable cause properly. | Counsel's performance fell within reasonable professional assistance; no prejudice shown. | No reversible error; ineffective assistance claim rejected. |
Key Cases Cited
- Torres v. State, 182 S.W.3d 899 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (burden shifts to State to show an exception after warrantless search)
- Gore v. State, 451 S.W.3d 182 (Tex. App. – Houston [1st Dist.] 2014) (once a search is warrantless, State bears burden to prove exception)
- Jordan v. State, 394 S.W.3d 58 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012) (odor in small space supports probable cause to search)
- Estrada v. State, 154 S.W.3d 604 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (odor as contributing factor to probable cause; not sole basis)
- McGee v. State, 105 S.W.3d 609 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (explanation of exceptions to warrant requirement)
- Steelman v. State, 93 S.W.3d 102 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (odor of marijuana in home insufficient alone for probable cause)
- Gutierrez v. State, 221 S.W.3d 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (three categories of exigent circumstances; destruction of evidence as one)