See Te x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 1 T e x . H e a l th &S a fe tyC o d eA n n . § 4 8 1 .1 1 2 (d )(V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ). 2 

## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 07- 262- CR GE NE NE W T ON AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M CRI M I NA LDI STRI CT CO URT NO . 4OF TARRA NTCO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A p p e l l a n t G e n e N e w to n ap p e a l s h i s c o n v i c ti o n for p o ss e ss i o n o f a c o n tro l l e d s u b s ta n c e . W ea ffir m . A j ury c o n v i c te d a ppe l l antofpos se ss i on w i t h i nt entt o de l i verf ouror m or e b utl es s t han 200 gr am s of coc ai ne. A tt he puni sh m entpha se , ap pel l ant 2Ha wki n s v. S tate , 1 3 5 S .W .3 d 7 2 , 7 7 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ). 3Id. ;see al

so Si mpson v. State, 119 S . W . 3d 262, 272 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 4 2 0 0 3 ), cert. deni

ed, 5 4 2 U .S . 9 0 5 (2 0 0 4 ). Ha wkin s, 1 3 5 S .W .3 d a t 7 7 ; Mo sleyv. S tate , 983 S. W . 2d 249, 259 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 ) (o p . o n re h ’g ), cert. denied, 5 2 6 U .S . 1 0 7 0 (1 9 9 9 ). 2 p l e a d e d tr u eto e n h a n c e m e n t al l e g a ti o n s a n d th e tr i a l co u rtse n ten c e d h i m to tw e n ty -fi v ey e a rs ’ c o n fi n e m e n t. I n h i s s o l ep o i n t, ap p e l l a n t co n ten d s th a t t h etr i a l co u rtab u se d i ts di sc r et i on bynotgr ant i ng a m i st r i al aft er su st ai ni ng app el l ant ’ s obj ec t i on t o t he St at e’ s j ury a r gum entan d i ss ui ng a n i ns t r uct i on t o di sr ega r d. W hen t he t r i al court sust ai ns an obj ect i on r ai sed on t he basi s ofi m pr oper j u rya rg u m e n t a n d i n s tru c tsth ej u ryto d i s r e g a rd b u t d e n i e sa d e fe n d a n t’s
m ot i on f ora m i st r i al , t he i ss ue i s w het her t he t r i al cou rt abu se d i t s di sc r et i on by den yi ng t he m i st r i al . O nl y i n ext rem e ci r cum st ances, w hen t he pr ej udi ce 3 caused by t he i m pr operar gum enti s i ncur ab l e, i . e. , “so pr ej udi ci al t hat e x p e n d it u r eo ff u rt h e r t im e a n d e x p e n s ew o u ld b ew a s t e f u l a n d f u t ile ,” w ill a
m i stri a l b ereq u i red . I n d e term in in g w h e th e r t h etr i a l co u rtab u se d i ts 4 di sc r et i on by den yi ng t he m i st r i al , w e bal anc e t hr ee f ac t or s: ( 1) t he se ver i t y of th em i sc o n d u c t ( p rej u d i c i a l effe c t) , (2 ) c u rati v em e a su res , a n d (3 ) th ece rt a i n ty o f co n v i c ti o n ab se n t t h em i sc o n d u c t. 5Se eEverett v. S tate , 7 0 7 S .W .2 d 6 3 8 , 6 4 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 6 ). 6 3 I n r esponse t o def ense coun sel ’ s cl osi ng ar gum ent t hatt he pol i ce ar r est ed a p p e l l a n t b e fo reth e y h a d p ro b a b l e c a u s ea n d , c o n s e q u e n tl y , b e fo reth e yw e re l e g a l l ya u th o ri z e d to d o s o , th e p ro s e c u to r s ta te d th a t s h ea n d th ep o l i c ew e re s w o rn to u p h o l d th ec o n s ti tu ti o n a n d l a w s o f t h e s t a te . T h etri a l c o u rt su st ai ned ap pel l ant ’ s obj ec t i on t o t he ar gum ent , i ns t r uct ed t he j ury t o di sr ega r d, b u t d e n i e d a p p e l l a n t’sm o ti o n fo r m i s tri a l . A l th o u g h th ep ro s e c u to r’sc o m m e n t th a t s h e a n d th ep o l i c eh a d s w o rn t o uph ol d t he l aw w as i m pr operi n t hat it p la c e d m att er s bef or e t he j ur y t hat
w e r eo u t s id et h ere c o r d , t h ec o m m e n tw a sn o te x t r e m e a n d w a sm a d e in 6
res p o n se to d e fen se c o u n se l ’s a rgu m e n t t h a t t h ep o l i c eex c e e d e d the i r au th o ri ty i n m a k i n g the arres t. Fu rt h e r, w efi n d the tr i a l co u rt ’s p rom p t i n stru c ti o n to di sr egar d w as suf f i ci entt o cur e any er r orand t hat , based on t he evi dence p r e s e n t e d a tt r ia l, t h ec o m m e n th a d n o e f f e c to n t h eo u t c o m eo ft r ia l. W eo v e rr u l eap p e l l a n t’ s s o l ep o i n t an d affi rm the j u d g m e n t. P E RCU R I AM PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; LI V I N G STO N an d DA U PH I N O T, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Oct ob e r2, 2008