Ex Parte Taymor Travon McIntyre
558 S.W.3d 295
Tex. App.2018Background
- Appellant Taymor McIntyre (a juvenile at the time) was charged in Tarrant County with capital murder and three aggravated robberies (Mansfield, July 2016) and later with aggravated robbery and aggravated assault (Arlington, May 2017).
- As a juvenile he was released from detention on conditions including 24-hour house arrest with an ankle monitor; he cut off the monitor and fled in March 2017.
- While on the run he was later alleged to have committed additional violent offenses, including an alleged capital murder in Bexar County and the Arlington offenses; he was captured in New Jersey and returned to Tarrant County in July 2017.
- The trial court sua sponte held the previously set $500,000 bond in the capital-murder case insufficient and ordered McIntyre held without bail; McIntyre filed a pretrial habeas application seeking reasonable bail in both Tarrant County cases.
- Evidence at the habeas hearing included the monitor-avoidance, subsequent alleged violent offenses while on the run, a high-risk classification on a risk assessment, and proffers of family supervision and a recording contract as possible financial resources/support.
- The trial court denied bail in both Tarrant County cases; the court of appeals affirmed denial for the capital-murder case but reversed for the Arlington aggravated-robbery case and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether juvenile pretrial release = "released on bail pending trial" under Tex. Const. art. I, § 11b | McIntyre: juvenile release is not equivalent to adult bail; constitutional bail protections differ for juveniles | State: juvenile predelinquency release with conditions serves same purpose as adult bond and should trigger §11b when violated | Court: juvenile release treated as "released on bail pending trial" for §11b purposes; affirmed denial of bail in capital-murder case |
| Whether violation of juvenile release (cutting monitor/fleeing) supports denial of bail under art. I, § 11b | McIntyre: violations do not permit denial under §11b because juvenile context differs or release related only to the Mansfield case | State: violation is revocation of release and, given alleged subsequent violent crimes, supports denial to protect victims/community | Court: finding that McIntyre violated conditions and allegedly committed further violent felonies justified denial under §11b in the capital-murder case |
| Whether the trial court could deny bail in the separate Arlington aggravated-robbery case based on the violated juvenile release tied to the Mansfield capital-murder case | McIntyre: cannot deny bail in Arlington case because juvenile release applied only to the Mansfield matter | State: argued for any-authority or "extraordinary circumstances" to deny bail across cases | Court: §11b does not apply because no release was granted in the Arlington case; extraordinary-circumstances exception not applied; reversed and remanded to set bail |
| Standard and scope of appellate review of habeas denial | McIntyre: where facts undisputed, legal standards control and de novo review applies | State: generally abuse-of-discretion review applies to habeas rulings | Court: applied de novo review to pure legal questions but will affirm if any correct legal theory supports trial court's order |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte Wheeler, 203 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (standard for reviewing pretrial habeas rulings)
- Ex parte Martin, 6 S.W.3d 524 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (de novo review when legal issues predominate)
- Ex parte Green, 688 S.W.2d 555 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (juvenile certified as adult treated like adult for procedural rights)
- Ex parte Shires, 508 S.W.3d 856 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2016) (interpretation and legislative history of art. I, § 11b)
- Ex parte Davis, 574 S.W.2d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (presumption in favor of bail absent applicable constitutional exceptions)
- Gutierrez v. State, 927 S.W.2d 783 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996) (remedy of setting bail when constitutional exceptions to bail do not apply)
- Vernonia Sch. Dist. 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (U.S. 1995) (juveniles’ liberty interests are not coextensive with adults’ and are subject to parental/state control)
- Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S. 253 (U.S. 1984) (juvenile liberty interests may be subordinated to parens patriae interests)