Jerry Wayne Bannister v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Jerry Wayne Bannister v. State

DecidedOctober 17, 2008

Docket07-06-00280-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Jerry Wayne Bannister v. State (Jerry Wayne Bannister 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

Jerry Wayne Bannister v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

NO. 07-06-0280-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

OCTOBER 17, 2008

______________________________

JERRY WAYNE BANNISTER,

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF HENDERSON COUNTY;

NO. 2005-0854CL2; HON. NANCY PERRYMAN, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Â

Concurring Opinion

________________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â I concur in the decision to reverse and remand the cause for the following reason. The court in Harris v. State, 227 S.W.3d 83, 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) outlined what a defendant must show in order to be granted a Franks hearing. That is a defendant must 1) allege deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth by the affiant, specifically pointing out the portion of the affidavit claimed to be false, 2) accompany these allegations with an offer of proof stating the supporting reasons, and 3) show that when the portion of the affidavit alleged to be false is excised from the affidavit, the remaining content is insufficient to support issuance of the warrant. Id.

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â In the case at bar, appellant pointed out the portion of the affidavit that he believed was false; he contended that the pictures attached to the affiantâs affidavit were not of appellantâs house as stated in the affidavit. Appellant then accompanied his allegations with an offer of proof consisting of pictures of his actual home which home appears to be different from the one in the affiantâs pictures. And, finally, in excising the pictures of the house at which appellant allegedly possessed drug paraphernalia from the affidavit, the remaining content of the affidavit is insufficient to support the issuance of the warrant based on the fact that there is probable cause that drug paraphernalia would be found at appellantâs home. Therefore, I conclude that appellant established his right to and the trial court should have held a Franks hearing. Harris, 227 S.W.3d at 85.

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Accordingly, I reverse the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings.Â

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Brian Quinn

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Chief Justice

Do not publish.

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â

lse" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>

NO. 07-10-0268-CV

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â AT AMARILLO

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â PANEL B

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â SEPTEMBER 9, 2010

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ______________________________

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â FRANK GROENTEMAN,

Appellant

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â V.

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â LISA GROENTEMAN,

Appellee

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â FROM THE 367th DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY;

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â NO. 2010-50554-367; HONORABLE E. LEE GABRIEL, PRESIDING

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â _______________________________

Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Â Â Â _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss.Â Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) and dismiss the appeal.Â Having dismissed the appeal at appellant=s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

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