713 S.W.3d 913
Tex. Crim. App.2025Background
- Estevez was charged with misdemeanor DWI in November 2021, and released on bond with the condition that she commit no additional crimes.
- While on bond, Estevez was charged with several new offenses, including a second DWI on December 5, 2022.
- After her second DWI arrest, the trial court initiated contempt proceedings for violating bond conditions, but the show-cause order failed to specify the offending conduct.
- Estevez was found guilty of contempt, sentenced to three days in jail (probated), and committed to a treatment facility based on the second DWI.
- Thirty days later, Estevez filed for habeas relief, arguing double jeopardy; subsequently, the trial court withdrew the contempt order due to lack of notice.
- The court of appeals affirmed the denial of habeas relief, but the Court of Criminal Appeals ultimately reversed and ordered dismissal of the DWI charge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Successive prosecution bar | Previous contempt prosecution bars new DWI prosecution on double jeopardy grounds | Contempt order was void and withdrawn, so no jeopardy attached | Contempt order was void—no bar to successive prosecution |
| Multiple punishments | Being punished both by contempt and prosecution for the same conduct violates double jeopardy | No valid conviction or punishment for DWI since contempt order vacated | Multiple punishment attempt itself is barred by double jeopardy |
| Sufficiency of contempt notice | Notice was inadequate for due process | Defendant withdrew notice objection; procedure followed | Lack of notice rendered contempt judgment void |
| Jurisdictional waiver | Jurisdiction can’t be waived; must have valid charging instrument | Appearance in court constituted waiver | Jurisdiction is not waivable; valid charging instrument required |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688 (1993) (double jeopardy bars prosecution or punishment for a substantive offense after criminal contempt for same conduct)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (same-elements test for double jeopardy)
- Whalen v. United States, 445 U.S. 684 (1980) (same-elements test is method of statutory construction for double jeopardy)
- Missouri v. Hunter, 459 U.S. 359 (1983) (legislature’s intent determines whether multiple punishments are permissible)