Jeffrey Lon Sumner v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 27, 2000
Docket03-99-00299-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Jeffrey Lon Sumner v. State (Jeffrey Lon Sumner 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
Jeffrey Lon Sumner v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN



NO. 03-99-00299-CR
Jeffrey Lon Sumner, Appellant


v.



The State of Texas, Appellee



FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR-95-0144, HONORABLE JACK ROBISON, JUDGE PRESIDING

The district court adjudged appellant Jeffrey Lon Sumner guilty of two counts of intoxication assault and assessed punishment at imprisonment for ten years on each count. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.07 (West Supp. 2000). (1) The court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on community supervision.

Appellant's sole point of error complains of the overruling of his motion to quash the indictment. Appellant contends that the indictment is defective because it does not allege a culpable mental state in either count. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 6.02(b) (West 1994). The statute expressly dispensing with any mental element for chapter 49 offenses was not in effect when these offenses were committed. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.11 (West Supp. 2000).

"[P]roof of a culpable mental state is unnecessary where intoxication is an essential element of the offense." Hardie v. State, 588 S.W.2d 936, 938 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (citing Ex parte Ross, 522 S.W.2d 214, 219 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975)). Citing Ross and Hardie, this Court has held that no culpable mental state was required for chapter 49 offenses committed prior to the effective date of section 49.11. See Hyde v. State, 970 S.W.2d 81, 86 (Tex. App.--Austin 1998, pet. ref'd) (intoxication manslaughter); Sanders v. State, 936 S.W.2d 436, 438 (Tex. App.--Austin 1996, pet. ref'd) (driving while intoxicated). For the reasons stated in the cited opinions, we conclude that the motion to quash was properly overruled. See also Stidman v. State, 981 S.W.2d 227, 229-30 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, no pet.).

The point of error is overruled and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.



Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Jones, Yeakel and Patterson

Affirmed

Filed: April 27, 2000

Do Not Publish

1. The January 1, 2000, amendments to this statute are not relevant to this appeal.

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

Related

Hyde v. State
970 S.W.2d 81 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Hardie v. State
588 S.W.2d 936 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1979)
Stidman v. State
981 S.W.2d 227 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Sanders v. State
936 S.W.2d 436 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)
Ex Parte Ross
522 S.W.2d 214 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jeffrey Lon Sumner v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeffrey-lon-sumner-v-state-texapp-2000.