Ex Parte Larry Flores v. State
14-15-00620-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 8, 2015Background
- Appellant Larry Flores was charged in two separate Harris County district-court cases: felon-in-possession of a firearm (third-degree felony) and possession of cocaine (<1 gram, state-jail felony). He faced separate indictments and concurrent bail proceedings.
- Initial bond for the firearm case was set at $100,000 (Sept. 2014); after revocations/reinstatements the court later doubled that bond to $200,000 and set $100,000 in the drug case, for an aggregate $300,000 (Apr. 8, 2015).
- Flores filed habeas applications seeking reduced bail in both cases; a July 9, 2015 hearing produced testimony from a family member that Flores and his family lacked resources to post the bond; the State presented no witnesses or criminal-history evidence at the hearing.
- The trial court denied relief on both writs; Flores appealed alleging excessive bail under Texas statutes and the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.
- Defense asked the appellate court to order bail reduced to $10,000 (firearm) and $5,000 (drug); argument emphasizes Flores’s ties to the community, employment history, lack of passport, and inability to pay the six-figure aggregate bond.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the $300,000 aggregate bail is excessive under Texas statutes (Art. 17.15 and related) | Bond is grossly disproportionate to the charges (third-degree and state-jail felonies) and inconsistent with district bail schedule; effectively denies bail | Trial court acted within discretion based on court’s view of risk/records (trial court denied relief) | Appellate standard is abuse of discretion; record must be measured against statutory factors (case argues court abused discretion) |
| Whether bail violates Texas Constitution (Art. I, §§ 11 & 13) | Excessive bail clause violated because amount is oppressive and denies pretrial liberty | State contends bail was justified by court’s assessment (no evidence presented at hearing in record) | Court should consider statutory factors (nature of offense, ability to pay, ties to community); defense claims these favor reduction |
| Whether bail violates Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (U.S. Const.) | $300,000 is excessive and impairs presumption of innocence and ability to prepare defense | State’s position: court’s bail determination within discretion and aimed at assuring appearance/public safety | Federal excessive-bail analysis (Stack and subsequent Texas cases) invoked; defense contends amount effectively results in pretrial detention and therefore constitutional violation |
| Standard of review and relief | Defendant seeks reduction to specified amounts ($10k and $5k) | State opposes relief; trial judge denied habeas writs | Appellate review is for abuse of discretion measured against statutory and case-law bail factors; relief appropriate if bond used oppressively |
Key Cases Cited
- Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1951) (excessive bail violates Eighth Amendment; bail set to ensure appearance not to oppress)
- Ex parte Rubac, 611 S.W.2d 848 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (standard for appellate review of bail-setting and habeas relief)
- Montalvo v. State, 315 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (abuse-of-discretion review requires measuring trial court’s ruling against proper bail factors)
- Golden v. State, 288 S.W.3d 516 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (six-figure bail in controlled-substance context reviewed and reversed where excessive)
- Ex parte Ruiz, 129 S.W.3d 751 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004) (reductions of unusually high bail amounts in felony drug prosecutions)
- Ex parte Bogia, 56 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001) (six-figure bail for a non-capital felony found excessive)