IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00413-CR

EX PARTE JAMES RAY BROSSETT

From the 54th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015-1932-C2A

O P I N I O N

Appellant James Ray Brossett is charged in a two-count indictment with capital 

murder and attempted capital murder. Bail was set at $5 million, and Brossett filed an 

application for writ of habeas corpus seeking bail reduction. After a hearing, the trial 

court denied relief, refusing to reduce the bail amount. Brossett appeals, asserting in one 

issue that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to reduce the $5 million bail.

Specifically, the indictment charges Brossett with capital murder, alleging that he 

caused the death of Laura Patschke by shooting her with a firearm while in the course of 

committing or attempting to commit burglary of a habitation, and with attempted capital 

murder, alleging that Brossett, with the specific intent of causing the death of Trevor 

Patschke, shot Trevor Patschke with a firearm while in the course of committing or 
Ex parte Brossett Page 2

attempting to commit burglary of a habitation. At the hearing, the State indicated that it 

is seeking the death penalty and that Brossett had confessed.

With the trial court’s permission and with no objection from Brossett, the State 

made the following proffer of the facts and circumstances of the offense at the hearing:

Laura had been in a relationship with Brossett, but it had begun to 

deteriorate in February of 2015 because of Brossett’s conduct. Laura broke off the 

relationship in June of 2015. Brossett continually harassed Laura with phone calls 

and text messages, and at one point, drove to her house and hid his truck inside 

Laura’s shop. When Laura got home, Brossett came out and told her, “Yeah, you 

see, I can do that. I was here and you didn’t even know.” Laura reported Brossett, 

and he was arrested for harassment. The very day that Brossett was released on 

bail, he sent approximately two hundred text messages to Laura. Brossett was 

arrested again, this time for stalking, violation of a protective order, and violation 

of bond conditions. 

Brossett bonded out again on these new charges. Brossett was out on this

bail bond when he killed Laura on the evening of July 5, 2015. Laura’s three 

children had just returned from visitation with their father. Brossett drove from 

Arlington, armed with a shotgun with a flashlight taped to it, and a backpack with 

triple-aught buckshot shells. Brossett parked in a secluded area then hiked more 

than a mile through rough terrain to Laura’s home. Arriving at the house, Brossett 

went up the back stairs, kicked in Laura’s bedroom door, and fired a shot at Laura. 
Ex parte Brossett Page 3

Her children heard the shot, and her sons, in anticipation that Brossett might come 

to the house and cause trouble, had been sleeping with weapons close by. In 

response to the sound of the gunshot, the sons got their weapons and went to that 

part of the house. Brossett called out to Trevor, one of the sons, and fired at him 

twice. One round struck Trevor, breaking two bones in his arm. The children then 

fled the house.

Brossett then turned his attention back to Laura. He shot her in the left side, 

then he fired the fatal shot at point-blank range. After killing Laura, Brossett began 

searching the house and the surrounding area for the children, looking to “finish 

the job.” Unable to find the children, Brossett went back into the house, took the 

keys to a vehicle, and drove back to his truck. He parked the stolen vehicle in a 

secluded spot and drove his truck back to the North Texas area, where he eluded 

capture with the assistance of persons who were not aware of the murder.

Brossett called one witness, his brother-in-law Coy Pennington, who testified that 

he was married to Brossett’s half-sister, who was quite a bit older than Brossett. 

Pennington had married Brossett’s half-sister shortly after Brossett had been born, and 

they had been married for 47 years. Pennington said that Brossett’s mother died when 

he was in high school; he then went to live with his father for a short period of time, but 

eventually came to live with Pennington and his wife, and he stayed with them until he 

graduated from high school. Pennington kept in touch with Brossett over the years at 
Ex parte Brossett Page 4

holiday times, and they had hunted together before. Pennington said that Brossett was a 

hunter and had a number of high-powered rifles.

Brossett had another brother and a sister, along with a cousin who lived in 

Australia. Pennington did not know if Brossett had a passport, and he has always lived 

in Texas. According to Pennington, Brossett owned a masonry company, but his assets 

were limited. He thought that Brossett did not own his home, nor did he own any real 

estate or personal property besides his truck, firearms, and an ATV hunting vehicle. 

Pennington worked for the City of Forth Worth as a plumbing inspector, and his wife 

also worked, but they were not able to put up any property to help Brossett with bail, 

and there were no other relatives in a position to do so. Pennington testified that if 

Brossett was able to make bail, he could live with him and his wife.

We review a trial court’s pretrial bail determination under an abuse-of-discretion 

standard. Ex parte Rubac, 611 S.W.2d 848, 850 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1981); Ex parte 

Davis, 147 S.W.3d 546, 548 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004, no pet.). A habeas applicant bears the 

burden of proving that his bail is excessive. Rubac, 611 S.W.2d at 849; Davis, 147 S.W.3d 

at 548. Article 17.15 lists five factors to be considered in determining what bail is 

appropriate:

1. The bail shall be sufficiently high to give reasonable assurance that 

the undertaking will be complied with.

2. The power to require bail is not to be so used as to make it an 

instrument of oppression.
Ex parte Brossett Page 5

3 The nature of the offense and the circumstances under which it was 

committed are to be considered.

4. The ability to make bail is to be regarded, and proof may be taken 

upon this point.

5. The future safety of a victim of the alleged offense and the 

community shall be considered.

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 17.15 (West 2015). Other pertinent factors include family 

and community ties, work history, length of residence in the county, prior criminal 

record, conformity with conditions of prior bonds, and any aggravating circumstances of 

the offense. Rubac, 611 S.W.2d at 849-50; Davis, 147 S.W.3d at 548. We review the trial 

court’s decision in light of the above factors.

“[B]ail should be set high enough to give reasonable assurance that the defendant 

will appear at trial.” Ex parte McCullough, 993 S.W.2d 836, 837 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, 

no pet.) (quoting Ex parte Brown, 959 S.W.2d 369, 371 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1998, no 

pet.)). Although a defendant’s ability to make bail is a factor for consideration, inability 

to make bail, even to the point of indigence, does not control over the other factors. Ex 

parte Charlesworth, 600 S.W.2d 316, 317 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980); Davis, 147 

S.W.3d at 548. 

At the hearing, Brossett’s counsel conceded that the facts of this case “certainly 

warrant a significant and a high bond,” but that $5 million is far beyond similar cases and 

that $500,000 bail would be appropriate.

The State argues that $5 million bail is not excessive because: Brossett committed 

these offenses while out on bond; he has a relative in Australia; he is a hunter and has 
Ex parte Brossett Page 6

firearms and “field-craft” knowledge; and Laura’s surviving children, one of whom is a 

victim of the charged attempted capital murder, are witnesses and their future safety is 

at stake. Moreover, the State is seeking the death penalty, and Brossett allegedly has prior 

violent felony convictions.

Along with considering the future safety of the victim of the alleged offense and 

the community, the trial court can consider that the defendant’s commission of crimes 

while released on bail warrants a bail sufficient to ensure the safety of the community 

and the victim. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 17.15(5); Ex parte Jackson, No. 14-10-

00979-CR, 2011 WL 166933, at *5 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 13, 2011, no pet.) 

(mem. op., not designated for publication).

Several years ago the Fourth Court of Appeals addressed a $1.5 million bail in a 

capital murder case. See Ex parte Gonzales, 383 S.W.3d 160 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012, 

pet. ref’d). The court found that the $1.5 million bail was not excessive, id. at 167, but in 

a concurring opinion, Justice Simmons concurred because the appellant had failed to 

meet his evidentiary burden to show excessive bail, but she noted: “The $1,500,000.00 

bail amount in this case is fifty percent higher than any bail amount previously upheld 

for a single capital murder charge in the State of Texas and twice as high as any amount 

previously upheld by this court.” Id. (Simmons, J., concurring).

The State has not provided the court with any precedent upholding bail in the 

amount of $5 million or anywhere near that amount. We recently upheld bail set at $1 

million in a capital murder case. See Ex parte Lewis, No. 10-13-00448-CR, 2014 WL 2810629, 

at *2 (Tex. App.—Waco June 19, 2014, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for 
Ex parte Brossett Page 7

publication). Accordingly, after our review of the record and relevant authority 

(including the absence of authority in support of bail at or near $5 million), we hold the 

trial court abused its discretion in setting bail at $5 million. Brossett’s issue is sustained.

The trial court’s order denying the writ of habeas corpus is reversed. We render 

judgment setting Brossett’s bail at $1,000,000 and remand the case to the trial court to set 

conditions of bail that would adequately address any concerns should Brossett be able to 

post a bail bond in that amount. See Davis, 147 S.W.3d at 547, 553 (in related murder cases 

where bail was set at $1 million for each appellant, reducing bail to $500,000 and $750,000, 

respectively); see also Ex parte Bentley, No. 10-15-00301-CR, 2015 WL 9592456, at *3 (Tex. 

App.—Waco Dec. 31, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (reversing 

denial of habeas for bail set at $250,000 and rendering judgment setting bail at $50,000).

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

(Chief Justice Gray concurring and dissenting)

Reversed and rendered and remanded in part

Opinion delivered and filed April 28, 2016

Publish

[OT06]