Steven Cruz v. State
11-17-00008-CR
| Tex. App. | Jan 20, 2017Background
- Appellant Steven Cruz was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child in Sept. 2016 and has been incarcerated since conviction.
- On Dec. 8, 2016 Cruz moved in the trial court for a free reporter’s record for his appeal under Texas law, prompting a hearing.
- Cruz testified he had no employment, income, real property, stocks, bonds, or other assets and identified himself as indigent; an exhibit to the hearing supported this assertion.
- The trial court had previously appointed counsel at trial and for the appeal; Cruz later had retained counsel (funded by his family), but Cruz was unaware of the amount paid.
- The trial court denied Cruz’s motion for a free reporter’s record because it concluded Cruz was "able to engage independent counsel" (relying on his family’s retention of counsel) and thus must pay for the record.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed whether the trial court properly determined non-indigence and whether outside sources (family) could be considered in that determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Cruz made a prima facie showing of indigence entitled him to a free appellate record | Cruz: he is indigent, has no income or assets, and cannot pay for reporter’s record | State: Cruz’s family paid for retained counsel, showing ability to fund appellate costs | Held: Cruz made a prima facie showing; State failed to rebut; trial court abused discretion in denying free record |
| Whether court may consider third‑party (family) payments in indigence determination | Cruz: outside sources not legally bound and should not be considered | State: family’s retention of counsel indicates available resources | Held: Court may not consider family assistance (unless legally bound) to deny indigence; Abdnor controls |
| Whether prior representation by retained counsel defeats indigence claim | Cruz: prior retained counsel does not negate current indigence | State: retained counsel suggests non‑indigence | Held: Prior retained counsel alone does not defeat right to a free record |
| Standard and burden for indigence determination | Cruz: trial court must accept prima facie indigence absent contrary record | State: must show appellant is not indigent after prima facie showing | Held: Two‑step process applies; burden shifted to State and was not met |
Key Cases Cited
- Tuck v. State, 215 S.W.3d 411 (Tex. Crim. App.) (describes indigence entitlement to free appellate record)
- McFatridge v. State, 309 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. Crim. App.) (adopts two‑step burden/process for indigence determinations)
- Abdnor v. State, 712 S.W.2d 136 (Tex. Crim. App.) (outside sources not considered unless legally bound to pay)
- Whitehead v. State, 130 S.W.3d 866 (Tex. Crim. App.) (trial court’s non‑indigence finding must be supported by record)