Source: https://www.tdcaa.com/journal/a-prior-conviction-in-dwi-2nd-is-an-enhancement-not-an-element/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 03:04:57+00:00

Document:
In 2005, a ride in a little red Corvette led to a relatively straightforward test for determining whether an extraneous offense was an element that needed to be proved up at the guilt-innocence phase or an enhancement that was proved only at punishment.1 But parties still debated how that rule applied to DWI-2nd cases: Was the prior conviction an enhancement or an element? In Oliva v. State, the Court of Criminal Appeals finally resolved that issue definitively,2 but in doing so, it left the test more ambiguous than before.
But the statute uses identical language to elevate a DWI to a Class A misdemeanor with a single conviction. Because it “is” a Class A misdemeanor, then under Calton, the single prior would also be an element that the State must prove at guilt-innocence. In Oliva, the intermediate court of appeals agreed and found the evidence legally insufficient because the State had not proved the prior conviction at guilt-innocence.10 On PDR, the State and defense both agreed that the prior conviction was an element.
But the CCA decided to go a new direction.
Finally, the Oliva Court looked at the title of the relevant statutes. Section 49.09 is entitled “Enhanced Offenses and Penalties.” The CCA concluded that the word “enhanced” rather than “aggravated” indicates that the Legislature considered it merely a punishment issue rather than an element of the offense.26 Thus, only jurisdictional priors in the section would be considered elements.
3. Whether the enhancement is in the body of the offense’s statute or in a separate section. Again, this is one of the few distinctions between the DWI and evading arrest statutes. The prior conviction enhancement is found in the main body of §38.04, but for DWIs, the offense is described in §49.04 while the prior conviction enhancements are found in a separate section, §49.09. And this section is labeled “enhanced” offenses rather than “aggravated” ones.
Whether these factors will continue to be the ones the CCA focuses on in the future is, unfortunately, anyone’s guess. The CCA’s focus seemed to be on the policy considerations of not informing a jury about prior convictions in the guilt-innocence stage. Indeed, the concurrence joined with the majority based solely on that factor.28 This seems to indicate that court will look askance at any interpretations that involve proving a prior conviction before the punishment phase. Only if the statute specifically states that it is a guilt-innocence phase issue or the element is jurisdictional will the CCA approve of an earlier introduction.
Oliva did not overrule Calton or other prior cases finding that certain offenses do or do not require the proof of a prior conviction at the guilt-innocence phase. But for any offense that has not already been expressly decided, expect new litigation on the matter. Let’s hope the CCA will clarify the test in a future proceeding, but for now, it leaves a great deal of uncertainty.
1 Calton v. State, 176 S.W.3d 231 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
2 Oliva v. State, No. PD-0398-17, slip op. (Tex. Crim. App. May 23, 2018).
3 Calton, 176 S.W.3d at 232.
5 Id. at 234, citing Tex. Penal Code §38.04(b)(2).
7 Tex. Penal Code §49.04(b).
8 Ex parte Benson, 459 S.W.3d 67, 75-76 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015).
10 Oliva v. State, 525 S.W.3d 286, 292-93 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2017).
11 Compare Oliva, slip op. at 6, with Calton, 176 S.W.3d at 234.
12 Calton, 176 S.W.3d at 234.
13 Oliva, slip op. at 10-11.
14 Id., slip op. at 13.
15 Id., slip op. at 15-16.
16 Tex. Penal Code §49.04(b).
17 Tex. Penal Code §38.04(b).
18 Oliva, slip op. at 16.
19 Id., slip op. at 17-18.
20 Calton, 176 S.W.3d at 234-35.
21 Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 36.01(a)(1).
22 Oliva, slip op. at 19-20.
23 Calton, 176 S.W.3d at 235-36.
24 Oliva, slip op. at 20.
26 Id, slip op. at 27.
27 Id, slip op. at 28.
28 Id, slip op. at 5 (Richardson, J., concurring).

References: v. 
 §38
 §49
 §49
 v. 
 v. 
 §38
 §49
 v. 
 §49
 §38
 Art. 36