Driving While Intoxicated Case Law Update - Texas District ...
Driving While Intoxicated Case Law Update - Texas District ...
Driving While Intoxicated Case Law Update - Texas District ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
intoxicated (DWI) from a C/ass B misdemeanorto a C/assA misdemeanor, but could not, by itself,<br />
be used to enhance his DWI offense to a felony; to raise DWI to a felony. The statute required<br />
either a prior conviction for intoxication manslaughter, not involuntary manslaughter as was used<br />
in this case. Louviere v. State abrogated by this opinion.<br />
XXV. COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL/DOUBLE JEOPARDY<br />
A. JUSTICE COURT FINDINGS<br />
State v. Groves, 837 S.W.2d 103 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992).<br />
Justice court finding that police did not have probable cause to stop vehicle will not have estoppel<br />
effect on sfafe's subseguent DWI prosecution.<br />
B. PROBATION REVOCATION HEARINGS<br />
Fuentes v. State, 880 S.W.2d 857 (Tex.App.- Amarillo 1994, pet. ref'd).<br />
Ex Parte Weaver, 880 S.W.2d 855 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1994, no pet.).<br />
Where new DWI is alleged in petition to revoke but waived prior to revocation hearing there is no<br />
collateral estoppelwhen court does not find sufficient evidence to revoke.<br />
NOTE: HAD IT NOT BEEN WAIVED AND A NEGATIVE FINDING BEEN ENTERED AS TO DWI<br />
ALLEGATIONlN THE PETITION THATWOULD PRECLUDE FURTHERPROSECUTION OF THE<br />
DWI CHARGE UNDER EX PARTE TARVER , 725 S.W .2d 195 (TEX. CR|M. App. 1986).<br />
C. ALR HEARINGS-NO DOUBLE JEOPARDY<br />
1. ALR SUSPENSIONS BASED ON BREATH TESTS<br />
Ex Parte Tharp, 935 S.W.2d 157 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996).<br />
tn this case there was an ALR ticense suspension based on the defendant's having a breath test<br />
result of .10 or greater. Court held that there was no double jeopardy as the ALR disposition did not<br />
con stitute " p u n i sh me nt. "<br />
2. ALR SUSPENSIONS BASED ON BREATH TEST REFUSALS<br />
Ex Parte Anthonv, 931 S.W.2d 664 (Tex.App.-Dallas, 1996 pet. ref'd).<br />
Ex Parte Williamson, 924 S.W .2d 41 4 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1 996, pet. ref'd).<br />
Ex Parte Vasquez, 918 S.W.2d 73 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1996, pet refd).<br />
When the ALR suspensrbn is based on a breath test refusal, the "same elements" Blockburqer test<br />
is not met so there is no double jeopardy. The Court found the element that differs was that in the<br />
ALR suspension hearing, it must be proven that the defendant had an opportunity to and refused<br />
to submit to a breath test.<br />
L43