State v. Cindy Camargo

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 23, 2015·No. 03-14-00089-CR·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 03-14-00089-CR 8354697 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/23/2015 9:28:33 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE No. 03-14-00089-CR CLERK

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FILED IN FOR THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AT 3rd COURT AUSTIN OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/23/2015 9:28:33 AM The State of Texas JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk Appellant

v.

Cindy Camargo Appellee

On Appeal In Case Number D-1-DC-12-206451 from the 427th District Court of Travis County, the Hon. Jim Coronado, Judge Presiding

Third Supplemental Argument & Authorities

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW, Cindy Camargo, Appellee in the above styled

and numbered cause, by and through David A. Schulman and

John G. Jasuta, her undersigned attorneys of record, and

respectfully files this “Third Supplemental Argument &

Authorities,” and would show the Court that, on December 16,

2015, in State v. Villarreal, the Court of Criminal Appeals

1 dismissed the State’s motion for rehearing as having been

improvidently granted. Thus, the Court’s original decision, State

v. Villarreal, PD-0306-14 (Tex.Cr.App.; November 26, 2014, is

now final. In its original opinion, the Court of Criminal Appeals

held that the non-consensual search of a defendant’s blood

conducted pursuant to the mandatory-blood-draw and

implied-consent provisions in the Transportation Code,

undertaken in the absence of a warrant or any applicable

exception to the warrant requirement, violated the Fourth

Amendment. See Villarreal, slip at 49.

Appellee respectfully reiterates her suggestion that this case

is controlled by the Court’s original opinion in Villarreal.

Accordingly, because the State did not have a warrant and none

of the recognized exceptions apply, the trial court’s suppression

order is correct.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Cindy Camargo,

Appellee in the above styled and numbered cause respectfully

2 prays that this Honorable Court will affirm the orders of the court

below.

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________ ______________________________ John G. Jasuta David A. Schulman Attorney at Law Attorney at Law State Bar No. 10592300 State Bar Card No. 17833400 lawyer1@johnjasuta.com zdrdavida@davidschulman.com

1801 East 51st Street, Suite 365-474 Austin, Texas 78723 Tel. 512-474-4747 Fax: 512-532-6282 Attorneys for Cindy Camargo

Certificate of Compliance and Delivery

This is to certify that: (1) this document, created using WordPerfect™ X7 software, contains 307 words, excluding those items permitted by Rule 9.4 (i)(1), Tex.R.App.Pro., and complies with Rules 9.4 (i)(2)(B) and 9.4 (i)(3), Tex.R.App.Pro.; and (2) on November 17, 2014, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing “Third Supplemental Argument & Authorities” was transmitted via the eService function on the State’s eFiling portal, to Angie Creasy (angie.creasy@co.travis.tx.us), counsel of record for the State of Texas.

______________________________________ David A. Schulman

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

State v. Cindy Camargo, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

State v. Cindy Camargo (State v. Cindy Camargo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.