Jacob Arriaga v. the State of Texas
This text of Jacob Arriaga v. the State of Texas (Jacob Arriaga v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________
No. 02-25-00107-CR ___________________________
JACOB ARRIAGA, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 297th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1825337
Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found Appellant Jacob Arriaga guilty of the first-degree-felony offense of
manufacture or delivery of a controlled substance in Penalty Group 1-B (fentanyl or a
fentanyl derivative) in an amount greater than or equal to 200 grams but less than
400 grams, and the trial court assessed his punishment at 30 years’ confinement. See
Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.1123(a), (e); see also id. § 481.1022 (listing Penalty
Group 1-B opiates). In two points, Arriaga attempts to challenge an evidentiary ruling.
At trial, the State showed that during a traffic stop in January 2024, police found
Arriaga—the car’s driver and sole occupant—with drug paraphernalia and two pills near
the driver’s seat that were identical to the 3,000 to 4,000 fentanyl pills in the car’s trunk.
After testimony by the first three witnesses—the two traffic-stop officers and the lab
analyst who tested the drugs—the trial court held a hearing on extraneous-offense
evidence.
The State wanted to offer one of Arriaga’s other drug cases—a May 2022 case
out of Dallas County in which an officer had stopped Arriaga and found suspected
fentanyl—to show, among other things, proof of knowledge. Arriaga objected to this
evidence under Rules of Evidence 403 and 404. See Tex. R. Evid. 403, 404(b). The trial
court stated that it would admit this evidence with a limiting instruction and granted
Arriaga a running objection “to the entire testimony as to the Irving Police Department
arrest of Jacob Arriaga in 2022 in Irving, Texas, in Dallas County.” However, no
testimony about the 2022 Dallas County arrest was offered or admitted at trial.
2 In his two points in this appeal, Arriaga references his above-described objection
as having preserved his complaint regarding different testimony by Euless Police
Officer Joshua Bennett about a May 2024 traffic stop, when Arriaga was arrested on a
warrant for the instant possession-with-intent-to-deliver offense. Arriaga complains
that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting this evidence and that its unfair
prejudice substantially outweighed its probative value, violating Rules of Evidence
403 and 404(b). The record reflects that Arriaga has not preserved this complaint for
our review. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1.
During trial, Officer Bennett, a narcotics officer, testified that he was called on
the night of the January 2024 traffic stop and drug seizure because “sometimes patrol
has questions.” He determined that Arriaga should be charged with possession with
intent to deliver a controlled substance “[d]ue to the sheer weight and the amount of
narcotics that was located in the vehicle” and based on the way the drugs in the trunk
were packaged. He also arranged for the drugs to be tested, obtained the arrest warrant
for Arriaga for the instant offense, and arrested him for it in May 2024, when Arriaga
was driving the same vehicle as he was when he committed the offense in January 2024.
During Officer Bennett’s testimony, Arriaga objected to relevance regarding the
testimony about the drugs’ packaging and to relevance and speculation regarding
whether drug dealers drive other people’s vehicles, but he made no Rule 403 or 404(b)
objections.
3 To the extent Arriaga complains about the admission of Officer Bennett’s
testimony, he did not make the arguments in the trial court that he now attempts to
make on appeal. See id. And the record reflects that neither Officer Bennett nor any
other witness testified about “the Irving Police Department arrest of Jacob Arriaga in
2022 in Irving, Texas, in Dallas County,” the evidence for which Arriaga secured his
running Rule 403 and 404(b) objections. See id. Accordingly, we overrule his two points
and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
/s/ Mike Wallach Mike Wallach Justice
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: April 30, 2026
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jacob Arriaga v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacob-arriaga-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp2-2026.