Court Opinion

ID: 9679442
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 06:53:05.515828+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:13.608001
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTIONS FOR REHEARING
DUNCAN, Judge.
On original submission this Court reviewed the court of appeals’ opinion and concluded the court of appeals erred when it decided that the arrest and search of the appellant were authorized under Article 14.04, V.A.C.C.P. Relying upon DeJarnette v. State, 732 S.W.2d 346 (Tex.Cr.App.1987), we concluded that “[tjhere is simply nothing in these facts to support a finding that satisfactory proof existed to support the belief that appellant was about to escape so that the officers could not procure a warrant.” We continue to adhere to that conclusion.
In its motions for rehearing, however, the State argues several matters that require another review of this case. The State submits that even if the appellant’s arrest was not authorized by Article 14.04, supra, there are several other provisions under Chapter 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that would constitute statutory authority for the appellant’s arrest. Accordingly, the State claims that the facts of this case should be reviewed in light of these other statutes, particularly Articles 14.01 and 14.03. Such a review was not performed by the court of appeals when it affirmed the appellant’s conviction. Nor, did we engage in such a review because the issue on which the appellant's petition for discretionary review was granted was expressly limited to the court of appeals’ analysis of the facts and the applicability of Article 14.04.
Based upon the foregoing observations, and adhering to our conclusion regarding Article 14.04 as detailed in our opinion on original submission, the judgment of the court of appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to that court to be reviewed hra manner not inconsistent with this opinion.