Timothy Paul Bates v. State
06-14-00105-CR
Tex. Crim. App.Feb 5, 2015Background
- Defendant Timothy Paul Bates was convicted by a jury in Hunt County Court at Law No. 2 of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) for events of September 1, 2013; sentence: 180 days jail (probated 12 months) and $400 fine; notice of appeal filed June 12, 2014.
- Police stopped Bates after a Kwik-Check clerk reported he attempted to buy alcohol after hours; officer followed about one block and Bates pulled over promptly; no traffic violations or erratic driving were observed.
- Clerk Phillip Erickson described Bates as "odd/fidgety" but did not observe slurred speech, glassy eyes, or smell alcohol.
- Officer Brandon West administered NHTSA field sobriety tests: HGN (initially mis-administered; later 6/6 clues), one-leg stand (2/4 clues), walk-and-turn (testimony initially 3/6 then corrected to 3/8 clues), and two non-physical (mental) tests which Bates performed flawlessly.
- Bates told officer he had taken a painkiller ~2 hours earlier and was on anti-anxiety medication; medical records admitted at trial showed significant leg/back problems (bone grafts, plates, arthritis, prior fractures). Officer did not investigate medication timing/dosage or whether prescriptions could cause nystagmus.
- Appellant argues evidence was legally insufficient to prove intoxication under Tex. Penal Code §49.01 because (1) physical limitations explain poor performance on physical tests, (2) mental tests were passed, (3) HGN can be caused by prescription drugs and was not tied to alcohol, and (4) no signs of intoxication or smell of alcohol were observed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal sufficiency of evidence to prove DWI (intoxication) | State contends field sobriety tests and officer observations support intoxication finding | Bates argues (1) no driving impairment observed, (2) physical limitations explain physical-test clues, (3) mental-tests were passed, (4) HGN can be caused by prescriptions and no proof of alcohol | Appellant seeks reversal for insufficiency; brief asks court to reverse — no appellate disposition included in this brief |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard of review for legal sufficiency in criminal cases)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (clarifies appellate review focus on adequacy of evidence, not quantity)
- Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (recognizes appellate court must guard against irrational factfinder outcomes)
- Vodochodsky v. State, 158 S.W.3d 502 (Tex. Crim. App.) (cited on sufficiency principles)
- Washington v. State, 127 S.W.3d 197 (Tex. App.) (allows raising legal sufficiency on appeal)