Jeff Wingwai Ma v. State
14-16-00029-CR
| Tex. | Dec 1, 2016Background
- Appellant Jeff Wingwai Ma was charged with (1) operating a massage establishment that employed an unlicensed massage therapist and (2) operating a massage establishment that constituted a sexually oriented business; trial court convicted and sentenced him to 20 days jail and $500 fines in each case.
- Law enforcement investigator Tonya Ward inspected Traveler Spot Spa, found no state massage licenses, discovered business documents (assumed-name filings, bank records, utility bills) linking Ma to the spa, and found rules and notices suggesting non-licensed, sexual services and evasive measures (e.g., staff grooming rules, customer-time monitoring, posted notice that it was not a licensed massage establishment).
- Undercover officer Sergeant William Taber recorded an encounter in which an employee performed a table shower, a massage, and agreed to provide oral sex (brought a condom and moved to perform the act after Taber used slang for oral sex); the audio was admitted and corroborated Taber’s testimony.
- Evidence also included internet ads for Traveler Spot on adult/escort sites and photographs of spa rooms and an ATM in a shower area; Ward testified these facts supported the inference the spa’s primary business offered sexual gratification.
- Appellant contested ownership control and argued Lucky Girls, LLC or another individual (Koijai Kanya) owned/operated the spa; trial court resolved conflicts against appellant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Traveler Spot Spa was a "sexually oriented business" under Tex. Loc. Gov't Code ch. 243 | State: conduct, advertising, employee rules, undercover sexual services show primary business is sexual gratification | Ma: insufficient proof primary business was sexual rather than legitimate massage | Held: Sufficient — evidence supports that primary business was offering sexual stimulation/gratification |
| Whether Ma owned or operated Traveler Spot Spa for purposes of Tex. Occ. Code ch. 455 | State: bank records, assumed-name filings, utility bills, merchant application, and other documents tie Ma to ownership/control | Ma: ownership evidence contradicted by filings showing Lucky Girls, LLC or Koijai Kanya as owner | Held: Sufficient — court deferred to trial court’s resolution and found evidence Ma owned/operated the business |
| Whether judgments contain clerical errors regarding plea/plea bargain | State: record shows Ma pleaded not guilty and was convicted after trial | Ma: judgments incorrectly state guilty plea and plea bargain | Held: Modified — judgments corrected to reflect not guilty plea and no plea bargain |
Key Cases Cited
- Whatley v. State, 445 S.W.3d 159 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (standard for sufficiency review and resolving conflicting inferences)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (constitutional sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard)
- Henley v. State, 493 S.W.3d 77 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (interpretation of undefined statutory terms in context)
- Pedraza v. State, 34 S.W.3d 697 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, no pet.) (owner/operator indicates those who manage and control a business)
- French v. State, 830 S.W.2d 607 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (appellate authority to modify judgments to reflect the truth)
- 8100 N. Freeway Ltd. v. City of Houston, 329 S.W.3d 858 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.) (construction of Local Government Code definition of sexually oriented business)