Samuel Gene Hill Jr. v. State
13-16-00397-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 16, 2017Background
- Samuel Gene Hill Jr. was indicted for possession of methamphetamine (less than one gram), a state jail felony enhanced by two prior state jail felonies; a jury convicted and assessed four years’ confinement.
- Officers recognized Hill, knew of an outstanding warrant via TCIC, and, after locating him in a store, handcuffed him and searched him; a small baggie of methamphetamine was found in his pocket and later tested positive.
- Dash-cam video showed officers handcuffing Hill, telling him about the warrant, searching his person, and awaiting confirmation from the issuing county; the warrant was confirmed ~2.5 minutes after the drugs were found.
- Hill appealed, raising three issues: (1) ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to file a suppression motion (search unconstitutional), (2) the trial court’s judgment incorrectly labels the conviction as a third-degree felony, and (3) the court erred in assessing $1,800 in attorney fees though Hill was indigent.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the judgment to reflect a state jail felony conviction (with two enhancements) and deleted the attorney-fee reimbursement order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hill) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ineffective assistance for failing to move to suppress the search | Counsel was ineffective because the search occurred before officers had confirmed the warrant and thus lacked probable cause | Officers had probable cause from TCIC/warrant information; suppression would have been futile | Denied — Hill failed to show counsel deficient or that suppression would have been granted; search valid as incident to arrest |
| 2. Judgment misstates offense degree | Judgment incorrectly calls the conviction a third-degree felony instead of a state jail felony | State did not oppose correcting the clerical error | Sustained — Judgment reformed to show state jail felony with two prior enhancements |
| 3. Reimbursement of court‑appointed attorney fees | Trial court erred because Hill was found indigent and record shows no material financial change | State neither joined nor opposed deletion | Sustained — Evidence insufficient to support $1,800 reimbursement; fee order deleted |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two‑prong test)
- Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (failure to file suppression motion not per se ineffective)
- United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (search incident to lawful custodial arrest)
- Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (limits on searches when citation issued instead of arrest)
- State v. Granville, 423 S.W.3d 399 (Tex. Crim. App.) (warrantless-search/warrant‑check principles)
- Lopez v. State, 343 S.W.3d 137 (Tex. Crim. App.) (ineffective assistance standards in Texas)
- Jackson v. State, 973 S.W.2d 954 (Tex. Crim. App.) (burden to show suppression motion would have succeeded)
- Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552 (Tex. Crim. App.) (limitations on ordering repayment of appointed counsel absent material change)