Blanton, Donald Gene

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 12, 2015
• Docket: WR-57,250-13
• Status: Published

Opinion

. I 0~rct1J~'}Jo / zo,IJ !57td5crtcr u~u-1 o ~ t;

ft,usl'; "1/ .. rb->Of\-~/ 1i111 RECE~VED ij~ _ _:_______L_-=--~--"------· ~OURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS

-::;; if ryt:'j)eJfl!d b£#~ }3/lllf'loA/ . OCT 122015 d. /o_ _ _ _ All®lAeooia,Ciilri< D"'-'"')1 -s J;z,'Cj Lo 4"f77 - tfi-ps.G f/'d!'/!0/>JI/te- iJ3r s~-~~ I _5)1'cf!t1)r £J1~~1' · __ £ Hc..f os£ ra12-y f'11j!5 HI./d. fJtJE.s:lfil/ffi', (/1 -ro -,lj~ LodP)r ry~ ~h'J(;Yf_st tiJ41fE!//k#c~ f1£ft~/G /r'~!d -rfl6- C),,~jltl11/,1f¥!Pe-/J~ Su-JcPy/ f1/f>r/IJ~0 -;yeJ/-'d,.Y fO"f) JJ£11£ (o r/rj!Ecl. ~)·rJ4' AJ) f-J.u!~ LI!J! J.clcl)c_;lfj

l{o/tc._~ ~~~/Js f)t~lk:. <0~ £/'d!FA/d f)# rj6/to4 ;::65 )J£/r/~ Jo r/;~d fJ;P/,rc§!,-#1 Fit) /) ~/5·'1

~. .. .,

C),J llftl~icJt/t'O1'/ A 7 11- v.:J']!! sr '111/d 17 ry .v $ g&-Tffr..J»d:cJ/9/ i ;~R,lc/[JD;.JK!~-- 0~ ~/Jdf111~ ~~tJ!.j, j/f~f}s UIJ~£ J/0, J33P11-f~ !M) J:3/S~Vle rrjo/,btJ ~1j )Jt5fh/te/ "fr>r/J~d J9ff/r'C11~,Y Fa') 17 .v-:JP;;f ~-r rjfiJ!d!t'f.l.!..-..

-(a 7f¥ f/ol/c:>!jfiY£ cJ.uspct's: o~ ~ &J~P;Ji;F' f!J1)"rrf"!//}/ lf/J}kiJ/s: l_;onf~":S. 1·-/ou2J,_})oNA!d ~rC~-1€ !SMN70i- --r)tu-ta§J~ t3o7(7~ (JPp v~~tcJ)/5 /)R(:j s~ fiNd f!~') s~~N/ _JD 1]~ttS 1J'. I -rtf?JJIJ~ FjJJI~ ·. oF ltf!!C!/fll/6' "fJr<,o <::.JCddFf~ j?tf~s fl!)s Dry~, 'Pill f;J,oo/1 ~") )J~JY£ !o r/;rcd /)j;/l:cf->7,-d,./ ~') fJ .u-:JT),Y BF~,fdf}rrjdsj f)tld ~otJd 'if~o/~71;' S'7r;~ Vf//tJ - -r(h's ;fol/cry~__j 1.£ LotJRl /7~ j!o t/ov0'j5,

--rtf's toJ/21 0~ ~1j_·'rf,Ajf}/ /)f¥J£1J/s /1!7/£ O'Pj_jt'tt/IJ/ ~111)/:s.d,'~/,·o,/ /o ~ - / -~s.JJk IT .LA.Jry:; oF nj!7!1d/trrf»s ,If' --r;Jt·s 6flAJs~ .U;./d~l) f)Jfi. !;";sk.cN 6; oP# (ftfJ-S /J;,jSJ,'7,.J't"dJ f}!/d !{lit Ut/t'l£d ~~- LCYA!s-/F/.Ji,~oft} /)f}l/cd~_j_, ,t,c;7f7 ftNd roulj!lflf:ilflj ft1£t

. a,V flPJJ-~1 L3/zooi !fils ~o~/R~ brynf:"-/fo/ fttp16~k ~ 6 ;J!rrf!!C/ - ]5/f!tJ/tJ,l -Nf)-6'fZS0- (j~/ j)tGJ, y;;; d f1ri!/117df) ftp(J;, 'r~_-fJ;,'oN .-;:o') v-.J l)t'T oF~rEIJ-s to')fJJs /)df)~JM! /6 · -·· J/-ot, ~oil -(JI!C rwd,:a o~li~5,_'--- 0~Tfl€ ]f)!!)-/ Lod)b; )YtCtf/r£d .l.A_:)ijou/ ZAJ7j-'/1;€# 0'J?d!G-1J·

3. ;/I€J jilT£~~ 11-~d -Ia' tl/i-ft lj /);Ytl .U1d/bsj;~o4!fj;;G-- St-rC>v0 ~ 77/Eif}s. o4!!!J//dlj»Rd') _ ~u;d ~;tV6 j?oliHc/ 7~JIJ7(])'),!~'11j rJ/ (0ff?sr-ry/6 i/t6u:J IG,;,(

7~~k's -~

1/~Ev:J!j 5),·sU;V~')~ci ~~-~~c~ ~";) L/fr:IJ-~IJ ~fr

~ IJ']f)~sl::b jl;;~ Off!~!), J/'IE./Ic'j ~ikd 7(lk r-rj'sd~nj/Gff)cJ) riAPr0~1JNI} f)Nd F)9J!i'j-J 'f/j(¥-1f 6711-p:J&A /f?,rcK ;9/sd Tf/~ !}):s/IC·' C; !f!fo~~~!!J~: srj-'s~~td # rrf'~tf11-Nc:') rjfil)rJ 1;)/rf/1/f !fNd ~glf'}D____ p~~ off£!11s£ JIO') ~Irs 1[~/IJTcifc; ~L4dr"c~ rd!) "f'sd~Gnj4-/J/Yt:J!~ rrji1PrJ Nlff/IJ It,# f:dfi•ft;!J /)/1 j)l£!1)5- ~;f,'tj_J, ·JJ~(JAJ~ /, -.1 -f/t'dOl5,3~1J )}. S-JfJte1/, .

~b7~ZfD, 1/ S · C.f.:./13/ 3 J.;.£ci.U 1/1-lf crJ!Jit} 2)vE PPyofJ~~s 0ojf1/.Crj v..J7~1 -:S/!f~ /f!Jt;opt 1/6! 5of,'c:/,'j5 r:/;;sk's £..fldr6tlclfi /);/ovJs ;J 7D ?0 v,fcolJrytDCi~·o:J~~~~ ,y-···

fJjJ(JI61T12pr~dr 7'(~ S#i/Jlls .tJs;:.tf &f f!H s£ 7/01,'1;;~/f ,'!( 5~Vlt) ~ -r;¥ (_p,.rJc.J,>o,fS;: 77i11!/s -7/~ Lb~r,/,~f!-1/(J#'s- . /

Nnpu£- -1':;;~/t'lfo,'s, -,L ~ ---·· CJ;-( /tjJPyJ .0~/.10 r~J) a/!l!d &.JS/!ril)N rfJ~d /f:s o//0~/ ro 'fJTf od.4e}af - oF £/.YA~NctG 1)~ /t~d.. U(Jo~~ :;z---N qv~SJ,of' /d l),(fk-Nc/IJN! ' c::::-

ft~u!JI/:j;:. [ -lf'f/ocJ~.tJ~~ .. - I CJI/ rj/Jj.b4_,.fdt~j)oJ//J!d &.!3/fii!/dlfF _ r/r£J fit's rf

/) Z-!

. \ 1J_rdl!tlo1) (ffi./R (J~o~~lf fr(ttld !f,r~ 7ijf7~d ~ rr(o f,'ottfs , H -ry~ lj!Jv?n(/14 !_;ovN/j -:!'),t5/fjtici(AH7)~7T! J.vd.'e.-r'/J/ 2J.u~li 6~tsdl :3/ll·'FJ ;J!J/£ f.;/4/Jlflf l}dd . (p,f,/'Hcj!J ~/-'cJIE{c.E j}fk'd !J~ij~ j/,•j fo -s;;7ou0 JitMToi} /f¢_/<~IJ!/j --:c A!Qo ct6/c.d :tld J~[is(( 6R~t6j J3/A'j 7j£f>vs~cft /a rr/fi!j~ 1)~1';/!s: g!( 1)4: MlOTj's y!}~

1RI-idlrrrjJ s 'jK};i!if.

J45d !SI!NF) ;ltJ-/ti /fft/ltdI fj~/41~1€:d - ro · ~P;fory rrj fir's rf·~;sJi0,'/J/ _ . d.I/Jclr'o~tl s t: , '>-' ' .. / 2 JS ll(J/aN ;;( ;_d sl~e_{ KJO · I:Jl)' i· /J'~ f. J 17 /J 11A(Y

J '1- 7d;ii!ory -~ }(() /ld~J/1}/€' J)tirrjtGdj - '177 IJftvJ /o yav')su~ ---rtJ¥ 1j6jvks;.J/6cf ]~trbp Of7k-1) fli/JN ~/17 -rrp :s ltffl; ~J)/,~o,.;.

-!(l-is ~.;P.,/ jfAs J;i'l;s.O/c.poftl ?CJ . J . _r SS.Als~ If- .v0P;tf oF '7!941l"rf"' 3 .. ·

~r tJ -rzj-)s /Jild s;.tt( .UN'd~7j /}lf/. ~ &;_!io-f f5! ~~If~ l~x1/JS f'.io~

v07&1ff(- ~P;IS AErrf, 's.~~ ~t-(-s,·d~~ --r'(~ 'f~/ltio' fP)RjS -r!jfJ} ry;s jl-otlol)R}J!If- toAJP,/ t;-ryAJIJ jf)s ~~ory~! fJff'diJ~V 17Jid 77Jijk~._Jvd:Q~;.A; H~f·Q~ Of o 7 Z~-~t

..

· ;9lto~Nkj /)#d !(~/€-~ 7a 7fo/~ If 7£-/J~'):!J' OJ4 ~£/J1Iory //?~~{31 ·-l!td rr(r;%·o,«:s ~/f?l~ Go cMfs ~.'11 7k'j9/d!f ~/£;£/:/ fJ7!1€:!-s./fNj-

;/. GEE1)JiP,' c,~, 6p ~~1);;' c£ . . _A:J>c>~f~'ck ~-!:>lrrl-\lFlids. t/IJ/-E( _})~r/t/ :stry/"& Vf~J ;f-ol(oJ71f-!JI/C 0Pcj_J~ . GAstGy !!:)All), /1d~11J!I to~41j d<;./1)!~ /j-D..1R;. ;oO ,.. 15P-/t-, /! /J F'R :51 UfJs -s . ·· ryr&ftJ·'cJ )J,s._ {bsll).j~ .rrj1Hf£ci. Of/ rzi·s l~3~j}1Jj otC:s~p--/E-·i-J-kijrfot5:

D~ i I

;;.· . . I ~fi(T/iGf5~')~t#t;:t-PJ ,5 . . - I !) I 7-PG G~~~-at/: t.s; 1;~f) 1 /}fJfJ£11 ~s ffv ~ 1~~ ~1 , r~~It-~ f;!jJ /)111)/~ - ffi4s~ !{d.J!;3,o1f-/tj~3,6p~f4__ 1tJ11}/d. bt6f~ 3111-Nio4, ---- !f(//l C!NI, SO-.J 0 )1 Aff,rcJAm- - .-' _, ~ ~ ,YFJicJ. /l,dt{~ Sltt-NloAJ, rJ?~ /Qo1gf0 __h~'Jl5 r;::1)7]64111 ,·~! r::A1) ~tbJ7111€d lftj --r(~ '- - ri::fJA-:s j)6(JfF1)-q;g;.t; / t/72/'f~ll/ c...JPs:j,'eotj U77ryOQ_/,'aJ./f)/ .- ' 1/sNv).•O,tjS _JY,/,'s>o!( /11 =rtf.t s Tillis. UA!/IfO ~1)-//i[d ; ~-1 J3tf/A d rrj0 NY, lli-JOIJS ! _j)o f17C'7~!i./j''- ~~~,G!T"') /Wei !)~<:JIJ'?,E ijAfcJ~"j (J~4fl7/y f!JI /)~~juryj 11~ pnr!:..----- /Jfl7;1- ~;/6//o;:J!!iJ' :s:;Jo1'?/ /J/rdiJ-Vl/ :S.!IJJiE~ ~~~~~~~ /o nf/. /11f']~V . 01. totj0c}- ·a;;- /JfiiC! IF) uC IJA/ci' t_fD")'Fjl£cl ~~t'S/ ()~ rr/f 'j'-Jo~/~Q:JE-fi#cJ.__!JEf,k(f, ;j . ~ (~

o,tf J.nfli- J;~~

~/T!Jfnj!tt/ uiJ!·n1 J:vstP/47flto7 r~l6f £1)1~/17 )./t11) ~(!€ v-.J;fk/ e>fr'e-~ -S:,jjj/16d-io 7-Jfi /')r'4/0Q11f'··· f71tf ry:s ,'s No.j If {_,a-f/)Pc.-761 6fts~ .s~~ v0t II 15?· (J./tJ-13/ ~7-'~7 ~17.,.. NoTf!7P)u~ ,111/d 7/:7'~ lf2;·'1i! ,~(C_~F)rl.s v-:J:;/ L/16/FP:;fj srouJ J A~ fnj~t/ L o uJ/~ })> s 7Py; C; /t!~T)t(~i :6JIIE;.J7 1/o~;J~ ~r//Gj ojp ~ Jv,·lt(d. 7o ~1plrE' cJ.u,qoJ-y~ /1N'd Jv;~c/ /)~-.td n:;f}~d~/k~d/idl€f1'ru! 76 !(~ to~; (jr"/1/JP~A!s rfr1 !): ~7ry: c; jbiJrt/Q.~t/17/d &G-!(t£:J3;1J~/o.A! /Wd ' /v/£'d Mel fF;/)od-.v/~lll/ fi'_/ld!C;.(c£_ fo ?y-t: 0JtJ7

~~r /t};i}c7k:_c( ljfJ~~'fiJj /JN41rj P~1). - }tt5sf,'rr-(9ijj. ~/7f/7jy tc/k 1),./j}njjjf _ L9<~i!lj ·P!C?:~Jdlt&--(jl)

Uvlf '!p,.2flo~L~H~'J' :5::,7Jl7f!!y ·r;fk . f}~/11J4 tou~ty fJFJ~~~~ Cfids/ f!/t:d:v~;--a,-1 .. 7~

- ~./ ~- rytt! 61's~ ..u0JJE; /lff!J-e-Jkd. /0!3/'?·-f.;;v j}JL!d !fs ~d. 7/M /'jl/1/ lJ4;Jj~ 7o f>-rjdd /t JCh0'f/JT- o/T7h/c/ ~rrj~/fi,-w;-- {Jf}-< ~~c:-~-<}_J~ -~ / 'i/fo~jiiJ '.?~ -

!141 61fJI1Hf(/ CA~s-k:; 4o~p.3/S'r~~~ ~ jJeos:-E(eu/fi~:cJ,rd fi/'ol lf'"'/G.J:J :sps j11Jd76 rjd77;¥ J?~~!t·;:r~"fhl/r or-' (~tJ/-}S. Led~ (!)Flsry:jr'A/It! PR_ lj;/J; , cJ41A/~ 30J1:_(Jx:Y;:;' Of£/l{)Gitj /)fj/be -~~CJ.u,iZ2t-J?J1/CQJo~ J.fiJ{ I!J,'fll ..LA:JttJj)S1's.s- fl~

tJI-d/1-)t'/f/ (_jq:J_yfitCJ,'c/IIDJ ~~kid _ * LJ?d~') o(!_;),snj'~~/1/ /.J~ulj_L/f!OcJ5, .,/WCJ (?} dlffs /1/¥7 --:~'!~ _JdP;jl0r'A/ ~-t:j !fl.£ CJF)j_Jr'li/J/ 74 :Vdrdf~,.()/ --;;:::]19s. St/1 -r;rl;£! {o"I/Raii0!J. / -1/d.)o/~,e.A// ,., - t!f'dc].u~f ~d;./d 1 o-r/IJ!c/ M1£ ])1/J-tlld;; G

:,-r(d ~ t.J~g£ ~If~_ AloJ 6onf!l~'Q./Ji~J - - )~.J/-f!r~ UJ~u!lj5J?s7F)rCr /f1~7]4~f ~'1/~:J7 JjoP,v/;/£ ~rfK;j ofl,.~ [sM /d 7110£ :.0/)~r'l/lffd /iJ 7?1£· J-00-f---···-···-. 7f/t6· /)fi f1~!0!J fo/r' c£ e;,jf;-c£7s: . JJ;~d ;o 71K !f):ATlJ,uJZif ~71€(,; /1~ 5/IT~(lV~fd«SI) Ol);f (1/s. /)o!•cti ~} -

-- 1 :ft ~ /Jhs~. ~fl-s Hd; 60rrfjJ ;,~cflIta ~!t~f11J1· 6ovHij ::0~ SJ~;~f/fJ-~,1~/' kry;6-;J~ 1~,(;(/tE- J.,A)dffj tJ!f/e_g -- ~011/cJ ;J-11-£ !Gf;1;1J /h?f'-1~-o{ 7o ~-- tj47Jj /fi-JG ~fl~stf~N/<:Ji1 I~ /v/ J6,.f/J/J fl,J5,jiJN/oN lf/!Tf-S(6 u:Jou/d ~/IJ)£(;/ ~') JScos~ t!J!)~ s.. • -.__.-£ r_]J d,Jf1!d fb.JS(fi-lf,-'/d1 · ·- u-J

/{lfufl11f~>/ f:_~JJut

yOfia~~d~~ r -/a 7Jik' UJ;J!fj 6~61J;f''U/1/ /!jy!G/Jis -~ s.vJo1)J fJJ7:d/},/,'/ j/IJ£ 77!£_ ~/Jd.IGJ1.1c~ kJOtr:!JtJ /l)fr;e-J€d_ /j'l~ J.d1j ----- LeY!/,;; c;__;t&CF_3~till!d ~}5/lf/f;d;y~ Vj' 04 w-··~··

sP,JZt~ £yo 7~JJ/j f s,:; 72/J -0 ~""7~ ~&t /)Jf/Jr;j;~oi,::S,)IJ#?S · s.AJol)! /7./fi·rk~ / (J~($l2-(3/ /lisa S/A7£S .v:J'J,y C)/jltZj~l9s &ryty{/s/ ~r t¥a-i~ 71J4 /Jillr/ J.r:s/1):~/ - /)Jtol)fi/kj o!y,"v&)?;:!J {Jot~e;./ /.J~ffif'J })fi-16:;1 ~l£r(jlfipt ~r;,~d~ .

Sj!F!£'s - ;!;;~£ J/1£~'5_ ~7:!Jil #-71 6

~~1€¢=/tEs/i;-CT/Jf 7(1£ j)l):!_J Llf_3=]1JI0 1)j_,_ /JQ_ ~ <:JF)d··0 lo ··I!¥ S!fi?PS . ovCJ,I IF):IJ/ u-:J;ftl~s;;,. ... .u-..J7o jttSJ!j2.-VGcl 01/d~F) sv-.Jol),f' Ohf'! )1/fr !frE tQ. ·#---- to)}!d Ho7 ld/64/!f?j -sj~)?-S-~e ?l!J,rj ~(J/

St€ /f'fM-Q_tfG'~]'J!_J J!!!j /IGs/.~rfO,<_!j /af-'/1fJZ,. jJ,ItJte_, / 1 Sli'\ICS f!;o f''Jrr:f, fiXJ 7''-.!JiFf;; ;/Its No ~!Jj Fj;IZ(JoP); fofr:/. !Jo;J;d NaJ:S~ /J/~d v0:f7 ~ ]y ;;~yJ7;;ro7J1~1 ~'c-d /Jo!;ej ~ /~;i;j JnJjj f..JoAj//:;~OI_)o#/1/d !3/84/o¥ Fat) :Sjl)fgs_. ;€p7!_j,/-:l !f!XJ;~:/~4- fitld s:-flS-rlJ£-NC,f!- ;f,·j 7a -)J;/IEf /}1'/d ~'Dj/flf17s pf);sd~/ /N]j~ .. ~-'lf!ttv/ 7(¥-rjr'soGEf.-M~).,.­ rr/ftl)J:JJ)H/} !Jtfc/ J)o!/:d_y fJ/1//(Js. 6j!J/j_J6'o( flO{ /f£0 v.];/1; 77/t:J)/Sfl)XCi /t)-f

Dt 77%i· ~116's_-·-Ov..J/ /td'f-':s=: d-f' 6£4 IJJftfel,~rf., :!:jf)~ -Su.Jef)f ;91J!, 'c//JV:/ f~~;/A~/3/

/l. OJ/ /fPlJ'I .Zh 20t({)o,.JIJ!d ~.J3jiJ.y/oAJ~ 0;/f{d /fr3 rj_6f,•ot~ raJ) s:)IJ;:

;:L ~dr~ Z1'1?N'1 ?o ~ 6!Pl£ ~·· Sv.Jo ~1 ,r/n,/,~t

-l')' 'IJ/ cJd;/5~- 6A s~1Jjj~,''j !Sft~s€¢ 0 ? Ffi1ro:d 70/)"1~ c1 r -rtJ~k'@J }tf311/ rfcl)}:ot/:; -lf/JJ rS tJ!Joj21ffi)/j /f)£ol /J~d Dfo/b~£ fY<~t

KAUFMAN COUNTY PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT

(ARREST WITHOUJ WARRANT) :

Notary public in and for, State of Texas !? oS My commission expir~ ~

[do find/do not find prob01ble cause o::x1sts to believe the above named person comminel! the offense.

- -- OFFICIAL SEAl - -, l\lagistrate l

1 not only to preliminary matters but specifically to

2 motions to suppress. Now if the court would require

3 that I have a live witness --

4 THE COURT: Is Granados specifically on

5 motions to suppress?

6 MS. HUNT: That was my understanding,

7 Your Honor. I could pull you a copy of that. I

8 believe that Granados v. State was on a motion to

9 suppress.

10 MS. BEESLEY: But that doesn't overrule

11 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

12 THE COURT: Court opinion, the motion to

13 suppress it might very well do that.

14 All right. I have Granados.

15 (Pause).

16 MS. BEESLEY: Does it say, Your Honor,

17 that affidavits are not required?

18 MS. HUNT: Your Honor, I also like to

19 point out that in the Kaufman County probable cause

20 affidavit, the only part that is not signed there is

21 the magistrate title. But if you refer to that section

22 of it, this is a probable cause finding. It's not

23 required on an affidavit to have a probable cause

24 finding. So the signature of the magistrate is not

25 relevant to the affidavit. f€; ..·~MABANK PO1ICE DEPARTMINT TX

July6, 2007 CHIEF OF POLICE ALEX SMITH .Ethel Magee 1517 Warwick P.O.Box293 Houston. TX 77093 129 E. Malket Street Mabank, Texas 75147 Mrs. Magee:

When an officer makes an arrest, the probable cause a:ffidavit is filled out. The information provided on the affidavit is a description of the incident and the details 1:hat cause the officer tQ make the arrest.

The probable affidavit .is notarized or witnessed by another officer and is presented to the Magistrate at the time of arraignment The Magistrate determines whether he/she believes there was probable cause for the arrest ·

I hope this answers any questions you have about the probable cause affidavit

Alex Smith Chief of Police Mabank Police Dept 20

1 THE COURT: Twenty-five minimum.

2 MS. BEESLEY: You understand that? /

3 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. / 4 MS. BEESLEY: You also understand that

5 with proceedings here today and before this court that

6 the state, based on the fact that I presented them a

7 case, and that case would be Gregory Alan Pannell

8 versus the State of Texas, that they realize that they

9 cannot prove their case as it was alleged in that

10 particular indictment and have asked the court and also

11 asked you to be allowed to proceed on an information;

12 correct?

13 THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

14 MS. BEESLEY: You understand that you

15 have a right to have that case presented to the grand

16 jury, but you can give up that right and proceed today

17 if you decide to agree to give up that right?

18 THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

19 MS. BEESLEY: Is it your desire to want

20 to proceed on today with both cases knowing that you

21 have to give up your right to grand jury, have your

22 case presented to the grand jury, or do you want to try

23 the possession case and then later let them try the

24 tampering case against you?

25 I've also instructed you -- before you !.' . .·' \

Cause No. d '2>SlY-'6\.o The State of Texas § In the 86th District Court § Vs. § In and For § Donald Gene Blanton § · Kaufman County, Texas

INDICTMENT - Tampering· With Physical Evidence Third Degree Felony

IN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

THE GRAND JURY, for the County of Kaufman, State of Texas, duly selected,

empanelled, sworn, charged, and organized as such at the February Term A. D. 2005,

of this Court for said County, upon their oaths present in and to said court at said term

that Donald Gene Stanton, hereinafter styled Defendant, on or about July 10, 2004,

and before the presentment of this indictment. in the County and State aforesaid, did

theh and there,

knowing that an investigation was in progress, intentionally or knowingly d~!!._r_:oy a thing, to-wit: cocaine, with intent to impair its availability as . evidence in the investigation;

AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE

~<~Jdn:&a~ Foreperson· of the Graryd Jury .. · · ~ ·.• ·~ •.."'i

.. · .. .. , ~·

Recommended bond amount: $ ; ·.~

·I ")

.~~ ·:

Person ID: 12123 Cause No. cX3SqJ__q .L£. ~ ])is.fY\c...+ ~ The State of Texas . § In the Gow~ty Ceur=t at Law § vs § In and For § Donald Gene Blanton· § Kaufman County, Texas

INFORMATION

IN THE NAME AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

. . I, Ed Walton, Criminal District Attorney of Kaufman County, Texas, by and

through the Assistant Criminal District "Attorney whose signature appears below, on the

written affidavit of Ronnie Breathwit, a competent and credible person, herewith filed in 8/D..J+- J),t; irid CJ>UAJ- the CeeH"lt)· Oeufl: at Law in and for Kaufman County, Texas, do present in and to said

Court that on or about July 10, 2004 in the County of Kaufman and State of Texas,

Donald Gene Blanton, Defendant, did then and there:

Knowing that an investigation was pending or knowing that an offense has been

committed, intentionally or knowingly alter, destroy, o"r conceal a thing, to-wit: cocaine

and its packaging, with intent to impair its availability as evidence in the investigation, or

~&.

~·f2f:;: in any subsequent investigation related to the offense;

:-' 00000.3 Complaint Charge(s): Tampering With Physical Evidence;

Name: Donald Gene Blanton Assigned Prosecutor: Bi Hunt Address: P 0 Box-403 Arresting Agency: Mabank Tx 75147

DOB: 11/13/1962 Offense Date: 07/1 0/2004 DL: TX-09578477 Personal tO: 12148

I, the undersigned investigator, being duly sworn, do state upon my oath

·that I have good reason to believe and do believe based upon the following

information, to wit: the report of Joshua Jennings,the arresting authority, who

is a commissioned peace officer of the State of Texas, and I charge that

heretofore, and before the making and filing of this complaint, on or about July

10, 2004, in the County of Kaufman and State of Texas, Donald Gene Blanton,

Defendant, did then and there:

Knowing that an investigation was pending or knowing that an offense has

be.en committed, intentionally or knowingly alter, destroy, or conceal a thing, to-

wit: cocaine and its packaging, with intent to impair its availabiUty as evidence in

);~';the investigation, or in any subsequent investigation .related to the offense; , ~~~ ") .,r .<'·' . • ..,.. • .

AGAINST THE PEACE ANfu~bltf~NITY OF THE;STATE OF TEXAS.

Sworn to and Subscribed Before Me by the abov~named lnvestigator,;known to me to be a credible person,· on the )]f-~~day of ( J,. ~ . · ., 200 z:-.

000004 . ' . :-:,-;:...... );.

Bi Hunt

.···.. ~...~

·!':"-

·, ~~ .. '·.·· Cause No. 23579-86

The State of Texas In the 86th District Court

vs In and For

Donald Gene Blanton Kaufman County, Texas

~~·\

The State of Texas by and throu ~ iQ1inal District Attorney moves this

Court to dismiss this cause of action and\~·~~l!Jp~~J1•.thereof would show as follows: .'10··:"·~~:0 . . :':)i 1. The Defendant is charged with th~ offense1of Tampering With Physcial . ~- ,) \". ,·"~ \'·. ' ' Evidence. i;t'''\sA 2. The State moves to dismiss this cause of action in the interest of justice.

WHEREFORE, the State of Texas respectfully requests that the Court dismiss

this cause of action.

Respectfully Submitted Ed Walton Criminal District Attorney 100 W. Mulberry Kaufman, Texas 75142 (972) 932-4331 (972) 932-0357 (Facsimile) ::;: 0 0 r-

"-i-\.~~-~ (. ::J ~ A

'0....:::., L.L- :.~. N: 24027081 o'Dlct b')(C, , .··<"1

The State of Texas

vs

Donald Gene Blanton _ ~-~@Jfman County, Texas

. · . cr~:~=~iit-;,:\ ORDER ~~iS~JSSAL ·· . ~;·,:~~~~~~::~t~\ On this date, the Motion to Dismiss ®~!_~~!~~t~, of Texas was presented to the

Court. The Court is of the opinion that such tt.f2tf~shbuld be, in all things, granted. ~~tf''t~· . . IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that t igjcause of action is hereby dismissed. ,

SIGNED this -l- day of

:r:: . O~<:i·.: '-'- ::r::: , __ au.... w:::l ....Jc{ i::l:t: Certificate of Service

· This is to certify that a true and correct c~:~:yof this instrument was this day forwarded to: . \f.i.,if"- .

Deborah A. Beesley . P 0 Box 1589 · Forney Texas 75126

signed this "3.., ~of --~-U---=-,J____,'=:-___, < ,200_. 139

1 A. From November to July.

Q. And how ~any months is that?

3 A. Nine.

Q.

s yotrr ·c.a·i · vi'.cie o?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Could you explain why not?

8 A. My car W·aS .. not equippe.d wi:th. videci and audio

9 capabilities .at .tha.t time.

10 Q. At -~ in 2002 didn't all police cars supposed

11 t6 be eq~ipped with audio video?

12 A. .Mil3::o.e. was not working, .sir.

13 Q. Was .it not working or you didn't turn it on?

14 A. ·No, . sir, it. was not w·or'king.

·15 Q. Officer didn't tell you not to ttirn it on

1.6 corning to the seen, did he?

17 A. No, sir, he did not.

18 Q.·. When you arrived to .the scene, can you explain

·19 what'you Been?

.20 A; Officer Jennings had initiated· a traffic stop

21 on a silver pickup. And at that time r exited my

22 patrol vehi~le an6.cohferred with Officer ~ennings.

23 Q. And you never searched the accused vehicle?

J,24 A, No, sir.

25 Q. Did you see -- did you see any cocaine in the .'

t. ct\t-E f 1'A'-'~1Vr. . · t(). -- ~~·~.,JC~. TX MABANK POLICt DtPARTMENT CHIEF OF POLICE ·ALEX SMITH September 17, 2004

P.O. Box 293 Mr. Donald Gene Blanton 129 E. Market Street , Inmate Kaufman County Jail ~Texas 75147. 1900 E. Hwy 175 Kaufman, TX. 75142

P!me: M78 Dear Mr. Blanton: Fax: 00l-88742B8 This letter is in response to the letters that you have flooded my office with. Under Tex:as Govemrrient Code 552.028(a)(l), my office is not required to comply with an open record request from a person confmed in a correctional facility. However, I am forwarding a copy of the arrest report to you. Texas Government Code 552.029 that you referred to has to deal with your information being released as a.n inmate, not your right to information as an inmate.

In response to your allegation of corruption in this department and the allegation that Officer · Jennings took drugs from the trunk of his patrol car and placed in your possession. I find no evidenceofthis fact. The evidence we have in custody that you have been charged with can plairu_y be seen on video being thrown from the vehicle you were driving as it travels down the road.· · '

I can assure you, that this office will not "negotiate" the charges against you. This is not the functiol) of the Police Department. The Distri~t Attorney's office may offer Plea Bargains but you wili have to contact that office in reference to that matter ..

As to your request for Motion of Discovery, that also is a matter that is handled through the DA' s office. ·

As to the allegation of Racial Pr()filing, this department along with every department in the ·. yoo State has a policy that pertft!;rt;-&;'&icfai Profiling. I can assure that an investigation will be done in accordance with that policy.

·Mr. Blanton, I appreciate your determination in your present legal situation however most of· your efforts are being forwarded in the wrong direction. I recommend sending any further correspondence to the District Attorney's Office Chief of Police Mabank Police Department · 139). According to the applicant, all.patrol cars were required to be equipped with such

equipment and therefore, the officer's testimony to the contrary was a lie. But the

applicant provides no authority for the claim that all patrol cars are required to be

equipped with cameras, nor has he provided any evidence that Officer Swearingen's . . • - x·(-] :.r-r vt ~, ~ ·~ . .. . . patrol car had a dash c;mera. Thus, the applicant has not sustained his burden of .

pleading true facts that would entitle him to relief. 6 See Ex parte Maldonado, 688

S.W.2d at 116.

The applicant also contends thai Officer Swearingen committed perjury because it

conflicts with Officer Jennings' testimony concerning where on the/ street the evidence

was found. The applicant does not provide record cites for his claim, but in any case, the

State notes that both officers testified that the evidence was found on top of the roadway

with most of the contents having been spilled out (RR 4 at 34, 140). Those are not

inconsistent statements. Therefore; the aoolicant's . ..._... complaint ' .. . is.meritless. .

Finally, the applicant asserts that Offic~r Swearingen committed perjury by

testifying that Officer Jennings never went to the trunk ofhis (Jennings') patrol car when

in fact Jennings testified that he placed the evidence in his trunk (RR 4 at 33-34, 146).

However, the record reflects that Officer Swearingen also testified that he did not observe

6 According to counsel, OfficeJ_ ?.':Yearing<;:n's patrol car "':'as equip_p~~

CHIEF OF POLICE . ' ALEX SMITH October 21, 2004

! P.O. Box293 Mr. Donald Gene Blanton l 129 E. Mlt8l SIJ9el Inmate Kaufman County Jail -'·1 Mm,Ta 75147 1900 E. Hwy 175 Kaufman,]){. 75142 l ·I <..

Dear Mr. Blanton:

This letter is in response to your complaint of Racial Profiling by Officer J. Jennings #412 of the Mabank Police Dept.

By policy and by law a memo was generated to Officer Jennings detailing the nature and extent of the complaint. Officer Jennings responded back that yes in fact h~ did believe that your brother Matt Blanton was driving th~ vehicle which you were actually driving that night. Officer Jennings stated that he had previous knowledge of the vehicle and your brother because he had written Matt Blanton a citation for driving with an expired drivers license on June 6, 2004.

At the time Matt Blanton was cited, his license had been expired since 1998. I believe that Officer Jennin:gs had reasonable suspicion to believe that Matt Blanton was driving the vehicle and that his license was still expired. In fact a computer check performed ori this date revealed that Matt Blanton's license is still expired.

Even though Officer Jennings had reasonable suspicion to believe that a criminal offense was occurring he did not attempt to make contact with the driver of the vehicle until probable cause had been developed.

Do. to the facts that I have discovered and explained, I have no reason to believe that Officer Jennings was engaged in Racial Profilin~.

The complaint of Racial Profiling by Officer Jennings is unfounded.

Alex Smit ~- Chief of Police Mabank Police Department , .. ./'

IN THE 86TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT KAUFMAN COUNTY, TEXAS

EX PARTE * * DONALD GENE BLANTON, * APPLICANT *

ATTORNEY'S AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TEXAS ( ( COUNTY OF KAUFMAN (

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared DEBORAH A BEESLEY, Attorney at Law, who, by me duly sworn on her oath deposed and said as follows:

"My name is DEBORAH A BEESLEY. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State ofTexas. My, State Bar Card number is 02042300. I was the attorney appointed by the honorable Judge of the 86th Judicial District Court, Kaufman County, Texas, to represent, DONALD GENE BLANTON, Applicant in Cause No. 23,078-86 and Cause No. 23,592-86 in the 86th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF KAUFMAN COUNTY, TEXAS, which resulted in Applicant being sentenced to twenty years in prison in Cause No. 23,078-86 and to life in prison in Cause No. 23,592-86 by a jury.

"As to the claim that Applicant received ineffective assistance from his trial counsel, I would show the Court that I was not Applicant's trial counsel. I had been appointed to represent DONALD GENE BLANTON on August 2, 2004. I met with Applicant on August 4, 2004 at the Kaufman County Law Enforcement Center in Kaufman, Texas. At that time, Applicant had been charged with two felony offenses, Possession of a Controlled Substance .Penalty Group One, Less Than One Gram and Tampering With Physical Evidence. Applicant advised me that he was on parole and would have a blue warrant issued for him soon if one had hot already been issued for him. Applicant also advised me that the police should have a video of his traffic stop and that the tape would show the police planting drugs on him during the stop. I immediately contacted the District Attorney's Office for Kaufman County and discovered that their office had not received the police report on Applicant's cases yet. I met with Applicant again at the jail on August 12, 2004 to inform him that the District Attorney's Office did not have a copy of his police report or his videotape yet but that I would continue to investigate his case by contacting the Mabank Police Department myself. On September 3, 2004, I was able to talk with Chief

ATTORNEY'S AFFIDAVIT- PAGE 1

3 ·n ~' \.:)

:_ than the minim~m§Jiq.weq py_the eQhanc:ementparagraphs in his indictment. And his four prior felony convictions with four separate trips to prison would cause most prosecutors to not offer the minl"mum:--Appikanffold !Tie- that he wanted' now to argue that the plastic 6~fggTerhad nofbet:m-lhrown out of his driver's side window. He said that he wanted to argue that the baggies had come out of the back of his truck bed. He said that he would often times drive around town and pick up__rf?.~Y~I_g_QL~§_and that he may have picked up som~,b..aggie.s__w.Ltho~t. knowing what was contained in them. I told Applicant that I would ·o9Qraa-to arguetnanor to-a.Tlir, him·w he-tooid1fs-case trfal but that a jury would not tind that argument credible in any way since it clearly shows on the video that the baggies are being thrown out of the driver's window. The tape does not show anything flying up and out of the bed of the truck.

"On March 3, 2005, I learned that Applicant's case had been assigned to a new . / prosecutor.J3i Hunt.. I discussed Applicant's case with her and she gave me a new plea 1/ ow.·-·MS.""!RunCoffered Applicant a plea recommendation of credit for time served. Applicant had been in jail foralmO"sl eight mon'ths and that offer Would vioiate· M·r·. Walton's .. standlng-ciffice--poiicy.. I lmmediatel;i'drove ·to- the- jailarid--·relayed-tfi"Er newOfferTcdne· AppiTcaiifTadvised the Applicant that he had received an offer of credit for time served, which meant that he would not have to serve any additional jail time on the case. I told him that he was basically getting what he originally wanted. The Applicant said that he needed time to think about the offer. I told him that I did not know how long Ms. Hunt would keep that offer open, especially since it violated her boss' orders. I also told him that people were either quittingor being fired-frorri tfiafoffice-on practically a daily basis and that anc)ther prosecutor would not offer anything close to that credit for time served offer. Appficant still wanted time to think about the offer. On the following day, March 4th, I saw Ms. Hunt in the District Attorney's Office and she-asked me if Applicant had accepted her generous offer. I explained to her that he wanted some time to think about it. Ms. Hunt informed me that Applicant had until 5 p.m. that very day to let me know that he accepted the offer or she would withdraw it. I drove immediately out to the jail and spoke with Applicant. I told him that I needed to know whether he was going to accept the offer from Ms. Hunt and that I had to let Ms. Hunt know he had accepted it by 5 p.m. that day or she would withdraw the offer. Applicant rejected the offer.

"After rejecting Ms. Hunt's plea offer, the Applicant began corresponding directly with Ms. Hunt by writing her numerous letters. After being informed by Ms .. Hunt that Applicant was writing her directly, L~dvised Applicantto stop writing letters to Ms. Hunt or anyone else in the District Attorneis Office. Applicant completely ignored my advice. He continued writing her several more letters. In one of those letters, Applicant told Ms. Hunt that she did not have a case against him and that she should review the evidence against him. Ms. Hunt read that letter to me and I again went to the jail to advise Applicant to stop writing those letters to the District Attorney because she could use those letters as

ATTORNEY'S AFFIDAVIT· PAGE 4

31~ -~----' HWe& ~-·iii:iiiiiiiiiii----·......-;;;;,;;-;;;;;;;~~ c"' ...~·= •;• A*HP•s ±-. s 'U -. ··-·~ ... z:\t

Cause No.

Tht: St~tc of Texas § In the District :\ttornl.!y Office; 86th District Court § \"S § In :md For § . ~& 6. __E.ItJMfDA § ·Kaufman County. Texas

Offense: Poss cs Pt=, r L t~

Range ofpunishm~nt:

-Plea recommendation:

Npf!: IDI pig reeg•mnd•ltoD 1'¥1)1 be wltl!dnwe pt 'If time. rcr '"' re!JGI, pdl tb .Qftfemtagr 18mt ass&•MUtY ro UK s::.-;;rh ib Cqrt tm ;mpt!d "" utrrpclant) *· ,,, • !udgmiRllllfali. ~ ttovJ- This ph:a n.:commcndation W3S prepared on otlo3 r J las by ~Ahff~~lft. Privifieeed .and Confidential DEBORAH A. BEESLEY AITORNEY AT LAW METRO (972) 564-9571 MAILING ADDRESS FAX (972) 552-9571 PHYSICAL LOCATION P.O.Box·l589 I08 S. Bois 0' Arc Forney, Texas 75126 Forney, Texas 751 2~ September 24, 2004

Inmate Donald Blanton Kaufinan County Jail P.O. Box 849 Kaufinan, Texas 75142

RE: Kaufinan County charges

I received your copy of the police report. I will contact the District Attorney's Office once again to see if they have received the report from the police department yet. ··' The Kaufinan County DA does not allow the police agencies in the area to file a drug case until they have received the lab report on the drugs in that particular case. Therefore, if the DA has not received your report yet, it means that the police department has not filed it because they have not received your lab report back from the crime lab.

In the meantime, I have discussed your case with the Mabank Police Chief He has agreed to allow me to view the videotape when I can find the opportunity to meet with him at his office. He is not requiring that I wait until the tape is sent to the DA office for me to look at it. However, I will have to wait until the tape is sent to the DA office before I can receive a copy of it. )

Orice the case has been filed with the District Attorney's, J can assure you that I will take whatever steps are appropriate in defending your case, including filing a Motion for Discovery and Motion to Supnress Evidence, if necessary.

Sincerely yours,

\ClJ,'9'oh A. &,.)oA.~ DEBORAH A. BEESLEY Attorney At Law . .;: ~, ..... ' .... :" IN THE 86th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT KAUFMAN COUNTY, TEXAS

EX PARTE § § DONALD GENE BLANTON, § § APPLICANT· §

THE STATE'S.AMENDED ANSWER TO THE· APPLICANT'S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

COMES NOW RESPONDENT, the State of Texas, by the undersigned Assistant

Criminal District Attorney for Kaufman County, .and files this, the State's amended

answer to the applicant's application for writ of habeas corpus under article 11.07 of the

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, denying the applicant's allegations, and would

further show the Court the following:

I. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

The applicant, Donald Blanton, was charged with•tampering·withphysical

evidence 1 (CR at 3-8). 2 The State sought to enhance the charge with prior convictions,

and over his plea of not guilty, a jury determined that the applicant committed the offense

and assessed punishment at life imprisonment (CR at 24, 32).

Not content with thejury's verdict, the applicant appealed, and on July 21, 2006,

the Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. See Blanton v. State, No. 05-05- 1 In a related case arising from the same criminal episode, the applicant was. indicted for possession of cocaine in an amount of less than one gram, enhanced with prior felony convictions. Both cases were tried together. 2 References to the clerk's record will be denoted as "CR" and page number, references to the reponer's record will be denoted as "RR" and volume and page number, references to the supplemental reporter's record will be denoted as "RS" and page number, references to the State's trial exhibits will be denoted as STand exhibit number, and references to the Defense's trial exhibits will be denoted as DT and exhibit number. ·----------.. the outcome of the proceedings would have been different. 3 Thus, the applicant has not

shown that counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the ripped-bag allegation.

See Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (holding that

appellant bears the burden to affirmatively prove prejudice by showing through evidence

that the errors, if any, affected the outcome of the proceeding).

Moreover, the record does not support the applicant's allegation that counsel f~iled

to interview the lab technician before trial. Indeed, according to her affidavit, counsel

conducted a pre-trial telephone interview with the lab technician in which she learned of

the testing procedures and his results. Se·e State's Exhibit A. Then at trial, counsel

thoroughly cross:-examined the lab technician, questioning his method of testing the

substances and whether his results were verified (RR 3 at 119-127). The record does not

reflect that counsel was surprised by the technician's testimony, nor that she was ill-

prepared to attack his results. See State's Exhibit A. Thus, the record does not . .. . . affirmatively show that counsel was ineffective in this regard. See Strickland, 466 U.S. at

687; Thompson, 9 S.W.3d at 813.

Nor has the applicant shown that counsel's failure to secure a defense expert was

ineffective assistance of co-qnsel. The record reflects that counsel succeeded in having

the cocaine retested by an independent lab (CR at 119-120; RR 4· at 117-118). Then,

during the technician's testimony, counsel questioned why a different lab would

3 The applicant points to State's Exhibit 1 to support his allegation that the bags were not ripped. See Applicant's Appendix F. However, States' Exhibit 1 was only one of,the bags collected. Indeed, State's Exhibit 4 consisted of two bags that were clearly ripped, which according to the Officer, were collected despite their contents having .been spilt on the roadway due to the applicant's tampering of the bags and tossing them from the window (RR 4 at 42-43; / sx 4). ..j£, ill

6 -------------.-..: ---· __..,.~~ --·-·

106 {BLANTON EXHIBIT- 1 · particularly worked personally yourself?

2 A. Yes, I .did.

M,R •. CAMERON: May I approach the witness,

5 ·'rfiE COURT: You may.

6 Q. MR·. ·CAM:ERON: Let me show you, Mr .. Ma~ey, some

7 envelo~es that have been marked for identificatibn as

8 State's Exhibit 1, 2, ~, and.4; as~ if you can look at .. -.. ~

9 those en~elopes and if you're able to identify them.

10 A. ~Numhe.r. 4:,.. ·:-r :c:aJ}not. But Number ·~\ 2 ~ and -~;; I

11 :¢an.

12 Q. So Items 1, 2, and 3, how are you able to

13 identify those?

14 A. They each have our unique laporatory case

15 number on them as well as my initials.

16 Were Items 1, 2, anct·3 submitted to the DPS

17 crime laboratory in Garland .in a sealed condition?

18 A. Yes, they were.

19 Q. And when you receive an item like that, are

20 notes made in ords as to whether or not the

21 item was in a sealed ondition wh~n it was submitted?

22 .A• Yes, there

. 23 Q. And do you· in your. records how it

24 was received or who was received £rom?

25 Yes, we do.