Background

• Marquis Plummer, a felon, wore a bullet-proof vest and a holstered mini-Glock while working as a security guard at a wellness clinic.
• He was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon and unlawful possession of body armor by a felon.
• The trial judge entered a deadly-weapon finding for the body armor offense but not for the firearm offense.
• The court of appeals upheld the deadly-weapon finding in the body-armor case, leading to review on the meaning of 'exhibited a deadly weapon'.
• The issue presented is whether 'exhibited' requires a facilitation connection between the weapon and the underlying felony.
• The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that there must be a facilitation purpose; the deadly-weapon finding was deleted for lack of such evidence.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Patterson v. State, 769 S.W.2d 938 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (defined 'exhibited' and introduced 'facilitation' concept)
• Ex parte Petty, 833 S.W.2d 145 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (deadly-weapon finding cannot rest on mere possession)
• Narron v. State, 835 S.W.2d 642 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (deadly weapon not found on or near defendant; not sufficient)
• McCain v. State, 22 S.W.3d 497 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (facilitation by weapon where it enhances offense, even if not used)
• Whatley v. State, 946 S.W.2d 73 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (use or exhibit must facilitate the felony)
• Coleman v. State, 145 S.W.3d 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (noting distinction between 'use' and 'exhibit' in certain contexts)
• Tyra v. State, 897 S.W.2d 796 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (expansion broadens dangerous-weapon concept with facilitation rationale)
• Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (U.S. 1993) (federal standard requiring some nexus to facilitate crime)