State v. Beam

279 S.W.3d 680, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8239, 2006 WL 2690013
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 20, 2006
Docket07-06-0109-CV
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 S.W.3d 680 (State v. Beam) 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
State v. Beam, 279 S.W.3d 680, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8239, 2006 WL 2690013 (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

OPINION

MACKEY K. HANCOCK, Justice.

The State appeals the granting of appel-lee Judy Beam’s petition for expunction of records contending that Beam failed to meet the necessary requirements prior to filing her petition. We affirm.

Background

In June 2005, Beam was arrested and charged with the offense of terroristic threat; however, the misdemeanor charge was dismissed as part of a plea agreement. In February 2006, Beam filed a motion for expunction of records related to the June 2005 arrest and charge, which the State opposed. At a hearing in March, the State argued that Beam had never been charged with a felony arising from the June 2005 matter and that the statute of limitations for terroristic threat had not run prior to Beam’s filing of the motion for expunction of records. After the trial court granted Beam’s request for expunction, the State filed its notice of appeal.

The State’s sole issue is whether article 55.01(a)(2) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the expiration of the statute of limitations prior to the filing of an expunction request when the sought expunction involves a misdemeanor offense. See TexCode Crim. PROC. Ann. art. 55.01 (a) (2)(A) (i)-(ii) (Vernon Supp.2006). We have previously held that, when the sought expunction involves a misdemeanor offense, subsection (A), which requires the expiration of the statute of limitations pri- or to the filing of the petition for expunction, does not apply. See Ex parte M.R.R., 228 S.W.3d 499 (Tex.App.-Amarillo, 2006, pet. filed). Accordingly, we affirm.

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

Related

State v. Beam
226 S.W.3d 392 (Texas Supreme Court, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 S.W.3d 680, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8239, 2006 WL 2690013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-beam-texapp-2006.