Arturo Gracia v. City of Killeen, Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 13, 2009
Docket03-08-00197-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Arturo Gracia v. City of Killeen, Texas (Arturo Gracia v. City of Killeen, Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arturo Gracia v. City of Killeen, Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN




NO. 03-08-00197-CV

Arturo Gracia, Appellant



v.



City of Killeen, Texas, Appellee



FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 169TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 225,214-C, HONORABLE GORDON G. ADAMS, JUDGE PRESIDING

O P I N I O N



This appeal concerns the proper construction of the phrase "officially charged" in section 143.056 of the Texas Local Government Code. Section 143.056 permits the temporary suspension of a police officer without pay if the officer is "officially charged with the commission of a Class A or B misdemeanor." Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. § 143.056(a) (West 2008). Appellant Arturo Gracia was suspended without pay under section 143.056 as of the date an arrest warrant was served on him for a Class A misdemeanor. Gracia filed suit against appellee, the City of Killeen, Texas, seeking declaratory relief that he was not "officially charged" in accordance with section 143.056 until an information was filed against him in court some 32 days later. The trial court determined that Gracia's suspension was in compliance with section 143.056, denied Gracia's motion for summary judgment, and granted the City's motion for summary judgment. We reverse the trial court's judgment and render judgment that Gracia was not officially charged within the meaning of section 143.056 until the information was filed against him, and that the City is required to pay any compensation improperly withheld prior to the filing of the information. In addition, we remand for consideration of costs and attorneys' fees and further proceedings consistent with this opinion.



Factual and Procedural Background

Gracia was a police officer for the City of Killeen and a member of the City's fire fighters' and police officers' civil service system. The City is subject to chapter 143 of the Texas Local Government Code, the provisions of which govern municipal civil service for fire fighters and police officers. On July 27, 2007, Reese Davis, a peace officer, filed an "Application and Affidavit for Arrest Warrant" with a justice of the peace in Bell County, accusing Gracia of causing bodily injury to Elvia Paularena, a "family member and household member" of Gracia's. The application for an arrest warrant was supported by the affidavit of Officer Davis and a complaint signed by Paularena. The justice of the peace, acting as a magistrate under penal code section 15.03, then issued an arrest warrant for Gracia for the Class A misdemeanor offense of "Assault with Bodily Injury--Family/Household Member," and Gracia was arrested the same day. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(a)(1), (b) (West Supp. 2008). On July 27, as a result of his arrest, Gracia was temporarily suspended from the Killeen Police Department, without pay, pursuant to section 143.056 of the local government code. (1)

The matter was not prosecuted in the justice court, as that court did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate such a case. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 4.11 (West Supp. 2008). Rather, on August 28, 2007, the Bell County Attorney filed an information against Gracia in county court for the Class A misdemeanor for which he had been arrested.

Gracia filed suit against the City for declaratory relief on August 29, 2007, seeking his compensation withheld prior to the filing of the information on August 28. (2) Gracia alleged that a temporary suspension under local government code section 143.056 could not commence for a Class A misdemeanor in Bell County until an information was filed. The parties filed competing motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted the City's motion and denied Gracia's motion. Gracia appeals the trial court's summary judgment.



Analysis

We review the summary judgment de novo. Joe v. Two Thirty Nine Joint Venture, 145 S.W.3d 150, 156 (Tex. 2004). When, as here, both parties file motions for summary judgment and the court denies one and grants the other, we must decide all questions presented and render the judgment that the trial court should have rendered. City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351, 356 (Tex. 2000).

Section 143.056(a) provides as follows:



If a fire fighter or police officer is indicted for a felony or officially charged with the commission of a Class A or B misdemeanor, the department head may temporarily suspend the person with or without pay for a period not to exceed 30 days after the date of final disposition of the specified felony indictment or misdemeanor complaint.



Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. § 143.056(a) (emphasis added). Gracia contends that he was not "officially charged" with the commission of a Class A misdemeanor until an information was filed in court. An "information" is a written statement by the district or county attorney charging a person with the commission of an offense that may by law be so prosecuted. See Tex. Const. art V, § 12(b); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 21.20 (West 1989). The information must be based on and filed with a sworn complaint "made by some credible person charging the defendant with an offense." Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 21.22 (West 1989); see id. art. 2.04 (West 2005) (district or county attorney "shall reduce the complaint to writing and cause the same to be signed and sworn to by the complainant"). It is the filing of the information that vests the court with jurisdiction of the cause. Tex. Const. art. V, § 12(b).

The issue in this case is whether the phrase "officially charged" in section 143.056(a) requires that an information be filed in the appropriate court, as Gracia contends, or whether the issuance of an arrest warrant by a magistrate is sufficient, as the City contends. This appeal presents a case of first impression, as the phrase "officially charged" in section 143.056(a) is not defined by statute (3) and has not yet been construed by an appellate court.

In the case of a felony charge, an indictment is the charging instrument filed with the court accusing the defendant of the offense. See Tex. Const. art. V, § 12(b); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 21.01 (West 1989). An information is a charging instrument that performs the same function in the case of a misdemeanor. See Tex. Const. art. V, § 12(b); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 21.20. The indictment and the information are each filings that will vest the trial court with jurisdiction over the charged offense. Tex. Const. art. V, § 12(b); see Miller v. State

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Joe v. Two Thirty Nine Joint Venture
145 S.W.3d 150 (Texas Supreme Court, 2004)
City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News
22 S.W.3d 351 (Texas Supreme Court, 2000)
Texas Department of Transportation v. Needham
82 S.W.3d 314 (Texas Supreme Court, 2002)
Jones v. State
568 S.W.2d 847 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Mid-Century Insurance Co. v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission
187 S.W.3d 754 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Sanchez v. Texas State Board of Medical Examiners
229 S.W.3d 498 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007)
Miller v. State
909 S.W.2d 586 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Arturo Gracia v. City of Killeen, Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arturo-gracia-v-city-of-killeen-texas-texapp-2009.