S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 1 

## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 08- 022- CR
EX PARTE DA VEY REGENE KI NN ET T

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 89TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F W I CH I TA CO UN TY

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

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

----- ----- -- A p p e lla n tD a v e yR e g e n e K in n e t ta p p e a ls t h e t r ia l c o u rt ’s re v o c a t io n o fh is appeal bond . Because w e hol d t hat t he evi dence w as suf f i ci entt o pr ove t hat
a p p e lla n t v io la t e d a c o n d it io n o f t h e a p p e a l b o n d , a n d b e c a u s e w e f u rt h e rh o ld th a t th e tri a l c o u rt d i d n o t a b u s e i ts d i s c re ti o n b yre v o k i n g th e b o n d , w e a ffir m . O n N o v e m b e r 9 , 2 0 0 6 , a p p e lla n t w a s c o n v ic t e d o f in d e c e n c yw it h a c h ild
a n d s e n te n c e d to te n y e a rs ’ c o n fi n e m e n t. I n a c c o rd a n c e w i th th e j u ry ’s
r ec om m end at i on, t he t r i al co urt su sp end ed t he se nt enc e a nd pl ac ed app el l antY v o n n e K i n n e t tis a p p e lla n t ’s e x -w if e , a n d D e w a y n e K in n e t tis 2 a p p e l l a n t’s b ro th e r. A ppe l l antw asap poi nt ed new cou ns el f or t he pur pos e oft hi s hea r i ng on 3 t he S t at e’ s m ot i on t o r evoke so t hat he coul d cal l hi s or i gi nal counsel t o appear asa w i t nes s att he hea r i ng. 2 on t en yea r s’ co m m uni t y s u p ervi si on. Appel l antw asr equ i r ed unde rt he
con di t i onsofco m m uni t y s upe r vi si on t o su bm i t t o 180 day s’ con f i nem enti n t he
cou nt y j ai l . O n Apr i l 26, 2007 , t he t r i al co urt g ra n te d app el l ant ’ s m ot i on f or bai l pe ndi ng a ppe al , an d i ts ett he app ea l bond at$25, 0 0 0 . O n e o ft he
c o n d i ti o n s o f t h e ap p e a l b o n d w a s th a t a p p e l l a n t “s h a l l h a v e n o v i sit a ti o n w i th hi s chi l d( r en) w i t hout su pervi si on byYvonne Ki nne t torD ew ayn e Ki nne t tan d i n no even t shal l any appr oved vi si t at i on exceed 3 hou r s dur at i on ata f r equen cy no[ t ] t o exceed t hr ee ( 3) t i m es per m onth. ” Th e S t at e f i l ed a m ot i on t o r evoke 2 t h e a p p e a l b o n d o n O c t o b e r1 8 , 2 0 0 7 , a s s e rt in g t h a t a p p e lla n th a d v io la t e d t h is
c o n d i ti o n b yv i sit i n g h i s c h i l d w i th o u t ei th e r Y v o n n e o r D e w a y n e p res e n t. Th e t r i a l c ou rt he a r d t he St a t e ’ s m ot i on on Dec e m be r 2 0 , 2 0 07. A ppel l ant ’ s t r i al and appel l at e coun sel t est i f i ed t hathe m etw i t h appel l antaf t er 3 app el l antbond ed outofj ai l an d t ol d a ppe l l antt hatt he con di t i on on vi si t at i on con t ai ned i n t he app ea l bond w ast he sa m e a s t he con di t i on on vi si tat i onT h e v i sit a ti o n co n d i ti o n i n th e o rde r i m p o sing co n d i ti o n s o f co m m u n i ty 4 su pervi si on pr ovi ded , “ N o vi si t at i on s hal l be ap pr ove d w i t houts upe r vi si on by Y vonn e K i nnettorD ew ayne K i nnettand i n no even tsh a ll a ny app r oved vi si t at i on exceed 3 ho ur s dur at i on ata f r equen cy not t o exceed t hr ee ( 3) t i m es per ca l end ar m ont h. ” A ppe l l antw ass pec i f i ca l l y m adeaw ar e o ft hi s con di t i on by t he t r i al cou rt j udge at app el l ant ’ s N ove m ber 9, 200 6 se nt enc i n g h e a r i ng. 3 con t ai ned i n t he or deri m pos i ng c o ndi t i onsofco m m uni t y s upe r vi si on. 4 Furt her m or e, ap pel l ant ’ s pr oba t i on of f i ce r t es t i f i ed t hathe m etw i t h a ppe l l ant
o n M a y2 , 2 0 0 7 , a n d w e n t ov e r t h e c o n d i ti o n s o f t h e ap p e a l b o n d w i th app el l ant , i ncl udi ng t he con di t i on on vi si t at i on. Y vonn e t est i f i ed t haton t w o separ at e occasi ons, appel l anthad been
ac com pan i ed by D ew ayn e’ s w i f e, butnotby D ew ayn e h i m se l f , w hen ap pel l ant p ic k e d u p t h e irs ix -y e a r -o ld d a u g h t e ra n d t o o kh e rt o D e w a y n e ’s h o u s e f o rh is perio d o f v is it at i on. D ew ayne agr eed t hathe had no tbeen pr esenton t hose t w o occasi ons w hen appel l ant pi cked up t he chi l d, buthe expl ai ned t hathe had
ar r i ved hom e o nl y a boutf i f t ee n t o t hi rt y m i nut es aft erhi s w i f e, ap pel l ant , an d t he chi l d had gott en t her e. D ew ayne al so t est i f i ed t hat he never w as t ol d t hat t he vi s i t at i on w ast o bes upe r vi se d byhi m pe r so nal l y a nd t hathe co ul d not
s u b s t it u t e s o m e o n e in h is p la c e ; h e t h o u g h tt h a te it h e rh e o rh is w if e c o u ld
s u p e r v is e t h e v is it a t io n . D e w a y n e s t a t e d t h a to n t h e t w o o c c a s io n s t h a th is
w i f e a cc om pan i ed app el l antt o pi ckup app el l ant ’ s dau ght er , t hatar r ang em ent4

w asm adeby D ew ayn e f or hi s ow n con ven i enc e, and not at t he su gge st i on or u rging o f ap p e l l a n t. A t r ia l c o u rtm a ya d m ita d e f e n d a n tw h o h a s b e e n c o n v ic t e d o fa c r im e t o r ea so nab l e b ai l pe ndi ng a p p ea l oft he con vi ct i on, unt i l t he con vi ct i on b e c o m e s fi n a l . T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . art . 44. 04( c) ( V er non 200 6) . The
cou rtm ay i m pos e r ea so nab l e c ondi t i onson b ai l pe ndi ng t he f i nal i t y oft he
c o n v i c ti o n . Id. O n a f i ndi ng byt he cour ton a pr epon der ance oft he evi dence
o f a v i o l a ti o n o f a c o n d i ti o n , th e c o u rt m a yre v o k e th e b a i l . Id. A ppel l antar gued att he r evocat i on hear i ng t hatt he t w o t i m es he w as accom pan i e d b y De wa y n e ’ s wi f e t o p i c k u p t h e c h i l d d i d n o t c o n s t i t ut e a
v i o l a ti o n o f t h e ap p e a l b o n d v i sit a ti o n c o n d i ti o n b e c a u se i t w a s a n “i n a d v e rt e n t, t r i vi al m att er ” and w as“ ce rt ai nl y no tan y t ype ofvi o l a ti o n t hatw oul d ha ve occur r ed i n b a d f a i t h . ” Ap p e l l a n ta l s o a r g u e d t h a ti two u l d h a v e b een i m pr act i cal f orhi m t o r ef use vi si t at i on w i t h hi s daughterbased on t he m er e f act t hatD ew ayne’ s w i f e, and not D ew ayne hi m sel f , w oul d accom pany h i m t o pi ck up hi s dau ght er . Fi nal l y, ap pel l antpoi nt ed outt hatt he St at e h ad pr es ent ed no evi den ce ofan y pr obl em s ar i si ng f r om D ew ayn e’ s w i f e’ s ac com pan yi ng hi m on t he t w o occa s io n s. N evert hel ess, t he t r i al courtf oun d t hatappel l anthad
v i o l a te d th e v i s i ta ti o n c o n d i ti o n a n d re v o k e d a p p e l l a n t’s b a i l .5

A f t err evi ew i ng t he r eco rd , w e hol d t hatt he evi dence befor e t he t r i al
courtw as am pl y suf f i ci entt o show by a pr epon d e ra n c e oft he evi dence t hat
a p p e l l a n t v i o l a ted th e c o n d i ti o n o f t h e ap p e a l b o n d req u i ri n g all v i sit a ti o n w i th hi s chi l d t o be super vi sed by ei t her Y vonn e or D ew ayne. A ccor di ngl y, t he t r i al
cou rt had di sc r et i on t o r evo ke app el l ant ’ s bai l . S e e id . A t r i al co urt ’ s r ul i ng abu se s i t s di sc r et i on on l y w hen i ti s m a d e w i thoutr ef er enc e t o a ny g ui di ng ru l e s o r p ri n c i p l e s , s o a s to re n d e r th e c o n c l u s i o n u l ti m a te l yre a c h e d s o a rb i tra ry and unr ea so nab l e t hati tf al l s out si de t he z one w i t hi n w hi ch r ea so nab l e m i nds
m a yd i ffe r. S e eMo n tg o m ery v. S tate , 8 1 0 S . W . 2 d 3 7 2 , 3 8 0 , 3 9 1 ( T e x . C r i m. A pp. 19 90 ) ( op. on r eh’ g) . The t r i al courtexpl ai ned i t s r ul i ng as f ol l ow s:

. . . [ W ] hatconcer ns m e a n d w h a t - -t he one t hi ng I t r y t o st ay f o c u s e d o n t h r o u g h o u tt h is is t h e lit t le g ir l. A n d t h e o r d e rt h a tI h a d e n t e r e d a n d o r d e r e d t o p r o t e c tt h is l i t t l e gi r l f r om w hatappear ed t o have been cert ai nl y a pr obl em t hr ougho u t, b u t a nyw ay, t he C ourt ’ s or derha s t o becl ea ran d speci f i c. I d o n ’tk n o w h o w itc o u ld h a v e b e e n a n y m o r e c le a rt h a n it w as i n t hi s i ns t anc e. The C ourt ’ s or der i s not goi n g to h a v e an y h o n o r or d i g n i ty o r en fo rce a b i l i ty i f i t’ s l e ft u p to o th e rs to i n terp ret. I t’ s n o t go i n g to h a v e an yh o n o r or res p e c tab i l i ty o r en fo rce a b i l i ty i fi t ’ s n otf ol l ow e d t o a T.

. . . . I tw asve r y c l ea rw ho w ast o be pr es ent and w ho w ast o do t he m oni t or i ng. Thi s i s nota m at t ert hatca n be de l ega t ed by a ny i n d i v i d u a l i n v o l v e d i n -- an d re o rd e re d . A ccor di ngl y, w e cannot say t hatt he t ri al court ’ s deci si on t o r evoke appel l ant ’ s bai l w as m ade w i t hou t r ef er ence t o any gu i di ng r ul es orpr i nci pl es6

orw as so ar bi t r ar y and unr easonabl e t hat i t f al l s outs i de t he zone w i t hi n w hi ch
re a s o n a b l e m i n d s m a yd i ffe r. S e ei d. a t 3 8 0 , 3 9 1 . W e h o l d th a t th e tri a l c o u rt di d notab us e i t s di sc r et i on a n d af f i r m t he t r i al co urt ’ s or derca nce l l i ng app el l ant ’ s app ea l bond . P E R CU R I AM PA N EL F: M C C O Y, H O LM A N , an d GA RD N ER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: M a r c h 6, 2008