Gary, Steven Mitchell v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 9, 2015
DocketPD-1291-14
StatusPublished

This text of Gary, Steven Mitchell v. State (Gary, Steven Mitchell v. State) 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
Gary, Steven Mitchell v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

.-ilusjdM> ..1>^a.S 7&ZQ 1

.Rp:. Rpjqcj6&4 Pqr. Dmx^&ci

i2i££i_Oc^ aCA.

C^N/dgJP W^ QaJkita oC Ik*,

•?^r . IQ onvd Tgy\ CocV, o-C CR\r>^Ka\ • P^o- •CAMfsi.'Cx^ 5Q, IM , fog mo \Ua.V X Ko^cJ^

M W^ hay C-O.O- o-P Tp*r^ hp- n: ^:

RECEIVED IN H ^ n J O , ,!( -CQURX4)E-CBIMINAUAR&EALS \^C^Jc£±kiJtlL(J) -JAN-09-2015- f^OEAT PncicKeH (TQ£q Abel Acosta, Clerk NO. 2014-CR-2945

THE STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF § vs. § BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS § STEVEN MITCHELL GARY § 175TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AND INSPECTION OF EVIDENCE

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES STEVEN MITCHELL GARY, the Defendant in the above cause, under the authority of

U.S. Const. Amend. XTV, Tex. Const. Art. I, Sec. 19, and Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. Art. 39.14, and makes his

Motion for Discovery and Inspection of Evidence, and in support thereof would show the Court as follows:

I.

The Defendant moves the Court to order the District Attorney to produce and permit the inspection of and

the copying and/or photographing of, by or on behalf of the Defendant, the following designated items:

STATEMENTS BY DEFENDANT

1. All confessions, admissions and statements, in writing, signed by the Defendant, in connection with the offense with which the Defendant is herein indicted.

GRANTED: DENIED: .

2. All confessions, admissions and statements, oral in nature and set down and preserved under Article 38.22 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, made by the Defendant in connection with the offense with which the Defendant is herein indicted.

GRANTED: . DENIED:

3. All oral, written and recorded statements or memoranda of same made by the Defendant to any investigating officer or to any member of any law enforcement agency or to any third party and in the possession of or within the knowledge of the District Attorney's Office or any agent thereof, including any law enforcement agency, including those portions of any reports (including police offense reports) memoranda, notes, other writings, or records, which contain either a verbatim account' or a summary of the substance of said statements.

GRANTED: DENIED:

4. The written waiver alleged by the State to have been signed by the Defendant concerning the Defendant's right to counsel prior to the making of any written and/or oral statement while the Defendant was under arrest.

GRANTED:_i DENIED:

SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS.

JAN 09 2015

Abel Acosta, Clerk 5. All fingerprints, palm prints, and foot prints and reports of same, alleged by the State to have been made by the Defendant, his co-defendants and co-conspirators in the commission of the offense with which Defendant is herein indicted.

GRANTED: DENIED: „

6. Name, address and telephone number of all expert witnesses the state intends tp call as witnesses.

7. Name, address and telephone number of all expert witnesses who consulted with experts the state intends to call as witnesses.

GRANTED: DENIED: _

8. All reports of scientific tests, experiments and comparisons, and all other reports of experts and the name and address of each such person who made such report or performed such test, experiment or comparison, including but not limited to reports pertaining to anykind of weapons, controlled substances, andthe like.

AGREEMENTS

The existence, substance, and manner of execution or fulfillment, of any promises, agreements, understandings and arrangements, whether verbal or written, whether completed or not, between the State, its agents or attorneys, and any witness, or the witness' agents or attorneys or representatives, wherein the State has agreed, or purported to agree, either expressly or impliedly, as follows (Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 [1972]):

a. Not to prosecute or to assist in the avoidance of prosecution of the witness for a crime or crimes;

b. Not to prosecute or to assist in the avoidance of prosecution of a third party for a crime or crimes;

c. To provide a formal grant of statutory immunity, or to provide an informal assurance that the witness will not be prosecuted in connection with any testimony given by him;

d. To recommend leniency in sentencing for any crime or crimes for which the witness is convicted;

e. To recommend a particular sentence for any crime or crimes for which the witness is convicted;

f. To provide to the witness or any third person money, any other valuable consideration, or any forgiveness of debt or liability;

g. To provide favorable treatment injail or prison to the witness;

h. To agree to bear witness or testify for the witness at any judicial proceeding, parolehearing, or clemency proceeding; i. To agree to petition for executive clemency onbehalf of the witness or any third person;

j. To make any other recommendation of any benefit however slight, or to give any other consideration to the witness or to anythirdperson.

TANGIBLE EVIDENCE

10. Any and all evidence in any way relevant to this cause obtained byany law enforcement agency bythe use of electronic surveillance or wire tapping.

11. Any criminal instruments allegedly possessed or used byDefendant. GRANTED: DENIED:

12. Copies of any writings made by Defendant and not otherwise namedherein.

GRANTED: DENIED:^

13. All photographs or films of the scene of the alleged crime and the scene of the Defendant's arrest.

14. Copies of allphotos used inany photo spread or "mug book" used in connection with this case.

15. Complete records of any line-up conducted in connection with this case.

16. Any controlled substances, drug paraphernalia oritems adapted orused for the purpose of drug paraphernalia allegedly possessedby Defendant.

17. All articles of clothing, including shoes and rags allegedly belonging to the Defendant. GRANTED: DENIED:

18. All weapons alleged by the State to have been used by the Defendant, his co-defendants and his co-conspirators in the commission of the offense with which the Defendant is herein indicted.

19. All diagrams, charts, maps, plans, films, photographs, graphic representations, models, visual aids, books, recordings, or other suchtangible items or materials or demonstrative evidence, which may be introduced at trial. GRANTED: DENIED:.

GRAND JURY

20. A list of names, addresses and telephone numbers of witnesses who appeared before the Grand Jury, or whose Affidavits or statements were presented for consideration by the Grand Jury which returned the indictment in this case.

GRANTED:___ DENIED:= =

21. A copy of the Grand Jury Minutes and Testimony in connection with the indictment of the Defendant in the cause. If the same has not been transcribed, Defendant specifically requests the Court to order the transcription of the same. Said testimony may be used by the defense to impeach a States' witness, to discover prior inconsistentstatements, to test the credibility of States' witnesses or to test the recollection of the States' witnesses; thus a particularizedneed for same can been shown.

22. Any evidence that a member of the Grand Jury which returned the indictment in the above cause contained a member who was disqualified from serving on the Grand Jury because of a conviction or indictment.

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

Related

Bruton v. United States
391 U.S. 123 (Supreme Court, 1968)
Giglio v. United States
405 U.S. 150 (Supreme Court, 1972)
Ex Parte Adams
768 S.W.2d 281 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gary, Steven Mitchell v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gary-steven-mitchell-v-state-texapp-2015.