Page 43 - TPA Journal September October 2022
P. 43
commission of criminal activities. Nor can one discretionary review to answer the following
reasonably conclude that Appellant was question: Did the court of appeals err in
involved in any criminal activity pursuant to holding that evidence of a dating relationship
his membership in the Cossacks. That being so, was insufficient where the State presented
Appellant did not come within the purview of evidence that the victim referred to Appellant
Texas Penal Code sections 46.02(a- 1)(2)(C) or as her “boyfriend” when speaking to law
71.01(d). enforcement immediately after the assault, as
well as other circumstantial evidence
For the foregoing reasons, we adopt the suggesting the existence of an intimate
Fourteenth Court of Appeals’ analysis relationship? Yes, it erred. Therefore, we reverse
of Texas Penal Code sections 46.02(a–1)(2)(C) the court of appeals’ judgment and affirm the
and 71.01(d) in Ex parte Flores in trial court’s judgment of conviction.
interpreting Appellant’s issues on appeal. We
agree with the Seventh Court of Appeals that Maggie Bolden called 911 to report a
the evidence was insufficient to uphold disturbance at her apartment. La Marque
Appellant’s conviction for unlawful carry under police officer Richard Hernandez responded
section 46.02(a-1)(2)(C) of the Texas Penal and knocked on Bolden’s door. Crying and “in
Code. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of a bit of a state of hysteria,” she opened the
the Seventh Court of Appeals and render a door. Officer Hernandez observed blood on
judgment of acquittal. Bolden’s shirt and face. When he asked her
what was going on, Bolden stated that
Martin v. State, Tex. Court of Crim. Appeals, Appellant had hit her and was inside the
No. PD-1034-20, December 15, 2021 apartment in the bedroom. Hernandez then
********************************************* told Bolden to walk down the hallway and sit
************** down. From the doorway of the apartment,
Officer Hernandez called for Appellant to
EVIDENCE – ASSAULT, DOMESTICE come out and speak with him. After receiving
VIOLENCE. Dating relationship. no response, Hernandez entered the apartment
and found Appellant in the bedroom sitting on
Appellant Duke Edward was convicted of a bed. Hernandez arrested Appellant and put
felony assault for beating his girlfriend. him in the back of his patrol car. EMS
See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2)(A). eventually arrived on the scene to treat Bolden.
The offense was elevated to a third-degree Officer Hernandez later took photographs of
felony based in part on the existence of a Bolden’s injuries, asked her some questions,
“dating relationship” between Appellant and and gave her a family-violence form, which
the victim. see also TEX. FAM. CODE § she completed and signed. Appellant was
71.0021(b) (providing applicable statutory subsequently charged with the third-degree
definition for “dating relationship”). On felony offense of assault causing bodily injury
appeal, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals to a person with whom he was in a dating
reversed Appellant’s conviction, finding the relationship, second offense. See TEX. PENAL
evidence insufficient to meet the statutory CODE § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2)(A) (providing in
requirements under Family Code Section relevant part that assault causing bodily injury
71.0021(b) for establishing a dating is elevated to a third-degree felony if: (1) the
relationship. We granted the State’s petition for offense is committed against a person with
Sept./Oct. 2022 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 39
