Henderson v. State
526 S.W.3d 818
Tex. App.2017Background
- Damien Lamont Henderson was indicted for felony murder (underlying offense: injury to a child) in Harris County; the indictment bore a grand jury foreman stamp referencing the 182nd grand jury but was filed in the 177th District Court (cause no. 1426434).
- The Harris County District Clerk received and file-stamped the indictment; proceedings (arraignment, bench trial, conviction, and life sentence) occurred in the 177th District Court.
- At trial the court read the indictment, accepted Henderson’s not guilty plea, tried him, and convicted him of murder.
- Henderson argued on appeal that the 177th District Court lacked jurisdiction because the grand jury that returned the indictment was impaneled for the 182nd District Court, not the 177th.
- The State argued Henderson waived any challenge to procedural defects in the indictment by failing to timely object or file a pretrial plea to the jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the indictment was returned by a grand jury empaneled for the 182nd District Court but filed and tried in the 177th District Court | Henderson: indictment presented by 182nd grand jury to 177th court means 177th never acquired jurisdiction; judgment is void | State: any defect is procedural and was waived because Henderson failed to timely object or file a plea to the jurisdiction | Court held jurisdiction vested in 177th: presentment to district clerk and court occurred; any defect was procedural and waived for failure to raise pretrial; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dotson, 224 S.W.3d 199 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (indictment is presented when received by judge or clerk; presentment vests jurisdiction)
- Ex parte Alexander, 861 S.W.2d 921 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (district clerk is clerk for all district courts in the county)
- Ex parte Burgess, 152 S.W.3d 123 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (statutory discussion superseding prior authority on other grounds)
- Bourque v. State, 156 S.W.3d 675 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005) (indictments returned by one court’s grand jury may be assigned to another court under local rules)
- Tamez v. State, 27 S.W.3d 668 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000) (procedural irregularity in filing indictments in a different district court must be raised pretrial)
- Davis v. State, 519 S.W.3d 251 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017) (procedural transfer issues within a county are governed by local rules, not jurisdictional defects)
- Cook v. State, 902 S.W.2d 471 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (jurisdictional defects may be raised for the first time on appeal, but procedural defects cannot)
- Lemasurier v. State, 91 S.W.3d 897 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002) (failure to file timely plea to jurisdiction waives procedural challenge to indictment)