Ex Parte: Keelan Dre'Anthony Larue, Sr., 12-20-00269-CR

Appellant Keelan Dre’Anthony Larue, Sr. was arrested June 26, 2020 on two counts of Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity and held on combined bonds of $250,000.
On October 14, 2020 Larue filed an application for writ of habeas corpus under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 17.151 seeking release on personal recognizance (PR) bond or, alternatively, a bail reduction because he had been detained over 90 days without an indictment.
At the November 16, 2020 telephonic hearing Larue testified he had no assets, was 17 and would live with his father if released; the State conceded there was no indictment but invoked Governor Abbott’s Executive Order GA‑13, which purported to suspend Article 17.151 to prevent automatic PR releases during the COVID emergency.
The trial court denied relief; Larue appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion in denying relief and that GA‑13 is unconstitutional.
The court of appeals held GA‑13 validly prevented automatic PR release (so denial of PR bond was not an abuse), but GA‑13 did not suspend the statute’s mandatory bail‑reduction requirement; because Larue had been detained more than 90 days without indictment, the trial court abused its discretion by not reducing bail. The court reversed in part and remanded for proceedings consistent with ordering a bail reduction; Larue’s constitutional challenge to GA‑13 was forfeited for appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Larue was entitled to release on a personal recognizance bond under art. 17.151 after 90+ days without indictment	Larue: detained >90 days without indictment → entitled to PR release (or bail reduction) under art. 17.151	State: GA‑13 suspends art.17.151 to the extent necessary to prevent automatic PR release during emergency	Court: GA‑13 validly prevented automatic PR release; trial court did not abuse discretion denying PR bond (issue denied in part)
Whether Larue was entitled to mandatory bail reduction under art. 17.151 after 90+ days without indictment	Larue: statute requires release or bail reduction when State not ready within 90 days	State: relied on GA‑13 to avoid automatic releases (but GA‑13 does not suspend bail‑reduction clause)	Court: GA‑13 did not suspend the bail‑reduction provision; because State was not ready and 90 days expired, court abused discretion by not reducing bail — reversed & remanded for bail reduction
Whether GA‑13 is unconstitutional (bail, due process, separation of powers, executive power)	Larue: GA‑13 violates federal and state constitutional protections and exceeds gubernatorial authority	State: argued GA‑13 validly suspends statute during public‑health emergency (trial court relied on it)	Court: Larue failed to raise constitutional arguments below → claims forfeited on appeal; court declined to reach merits

Ex Parte Gill, 413 S.W.3d 425 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standard of review for habeas denial—abuse of discretion)
Ex Parte Smith, 486 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2016) (procedures and burdens under art. 17.151)
Behrend v. State, 729 S.W.2d 717 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) ("readiness" refers to prosecutor's preparedness for trial)
Ex Parte Castellano, 321 S.W.3d 760 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010) (state cannot announce ready for trial when no indictment exists)
Kernahan v. State, 657 S.W.2d 433 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (existence of charging instrument is element of preparedness)
Grado v. State, 445 S.W.3d 736 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (preservation rules; appellate review of forfeited complaints)
Ex parte Carson, 215 S.W.3d 921 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2007) (affirming issuance of mandate immediately in Article 17.151 bail‑reduction context)