Thomas v. State
336 S.W.3d 703
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Thomas was charged with felony driving while intoxicated with five enhancements; jury found him guilty and sentenced to 40 years.
- Incident occurred March 15, 2007: Diaz, Sweeny officer, stopped at a West Columbia gas station after a left turn without signaling.
- Diaz detected alcohol on Thomas; other officers arrived; breath test administered at a station.
- Thomas challenged suppression of evidence, asserting improper stop and coercive breath test; several evidentiary issues followed.
- Court addressed suppression standards, stop validity, breath-test voluntariness, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and mistrial claims; ultimately affirmed the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was justified as a Terry detention | Thomas contends no valid Terry stop outside his jurisdiction | State argues Diaz had extraterritorial authority and reasonable suspicion from traffic violations | Yes; stop valid and Diaz authorized under Art. 14.03(g)(2) |
| Whether Diaz’s stop was based on valid basis for Terry detention | Thomas argues insufficient basis for stop; no driver observed violations | State cites multiple traffic-code violations and scent of alcohol expanding scope | Yes; initial violations justified stop and discovery of intoxication justified further detention |
| Whether breath-test voluntariness was violated by coercion | Thomas claims psychological pressure coerced consent | Consent was voluntary; officers’ conduct insufficient to coerce | No; consent not proven to be coerced; voluntary under statute |
| Whether breath-test predicate was properly established and testimony admissible | Thomas argues improper witness and reliance on non-testifying source | Predicate established by machine operation, supervision, and admissible experts | Yes; proper predicate and admissible testimony by Stallman and Speno |
| Whether the mistrial/jury-misconduct claims warrant reversal or protest | Juror misconduct alleged; denial of mistrial | Record shows no misconduct affecting deliberations | Denied; no abuse of discretion; mistrial denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Balentine v. State, 71 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (Terry stop requires reasonable suspicion and proper scope)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 ((U.S. 1968)) (Foundation of investigative detentions)
- Wiede v. State, 214 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (Deference to trial court on factual findings; de novo on law)
- Amador v. State, 221 S.W.3d 666 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (Guides review of suppression rulings)
- Gette v. State, 209 S.W.3d 139 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (Voluntariness of breath-test consent)
- Reynolds v. State, 204 S.W.3d 386 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (Predicate requirements for breath-test admissibility)
- Marinos v. State, 186 S.W.3d 167 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006) (Alternative grounds for offense conviction)
- Ocon v. State, 284 S.W.3d 880 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (Mistrial standard; abuse of discretion)
- Iness v. State, 606 S.W.2d 306 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (Juror communication standards)
- Sholars v. State, 312 S.W.3d 694 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (Arguments misstate law; trial counsel links to charge)
- Mendez v. State, 138 S.W.3d 334 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (Preservation requirements on appellate review)