Opinion
No. 11-19-00258-CR
11-13-2020
RANDY SHAWN HOBBS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 91st District Court Eastland County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 25287
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The jury convicted Appellant, Randy Shawn Hobbs, of the third-degree felony offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.10(a), (f) (West 2016). Upon finding the enhancement allegation to be true, the jury assessed Appellant's punishment at confinement for twenty years and a fine of $10,000. We affirm.
Appellant represents himself in this appeal. He presents two issues for the court's review. In his first issue, Appellant argues that he is not guilty of the felony offense of bail jumping and failure to appear and that, if guilty, he is only guilty of a lesser offense: the misdemeanor offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. In his second issue, Appellant asserts that he is entitled to an acquittal because the trial court sent notice of the hearing to an incorrect address.
Appellant's first issue is based upon his bail bond in the underlying cause. In that cause, Appellant had been charged with theft and was released on bond. After posting bond, Appellant failed to appear for a trial court hearing in the theft case. The conviction at issue in this appeal stems from Appellant's failure to appear in the theft case.
The bail bond at the heart of Appellant's first issue reflects that Appellant had been charged with a "Misdemeanor, to wit: Theft of Property < 2500.00 2 or More P.C." The underlined portion of the preceding quote was handwritten in blanks provided in a fill-in-the-blank bond form. The bail bondsman testified that he filled out the bond at issue with information that was given to him by "the jail." The information on the bail bond is incorrect to the extent it reflects that the offense of theft of property valued at less than $2,500 with two or more prior theft convictions is a misdemeanor. That offense is actually a state jail felony, not a misdemeanor. See PENAL § 31.03(e)(4)(D) (West 2019). We note that the warrant that had been issued for Appellant's arrest for the theft offense correctly indicated that the theft offense for which Appellant was arrested (and subsequently bonded out) was a state jail felony.
The classification of the underlying theft charge controls the classification of Appellant's offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. A person commits the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear when, after being lawfully released from custody, with or without bail, on the condition that he subsequently appear, he intentionally or knowingly fails to appear as required by the terms of his release. Id. § 38.10(a). If the offense for which the person failed to appear is classified as a felony, the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear is a third-degree felony. Id. § 38.10(f). If the offense for which the person failed to appear is punishable by fine only, the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear is a Class C misdemeanor. Id. § 38.10(e). Otherwise, the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear is a Class A misdemeanor. Id. § 38.10(d).
In the case before us, the record reflects that, despite the inaccurate information on the bail bond, Appellant had been charged with a theft offense that was classified as a felony. See id. § 31.03(e)(4)(D). Therefore, the evidence supports his conviction under Section 38.10(f) for the third-degree felony offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. We overrule Appellant's first issue.
In his second issue, Appellant asserts that the trial court had an incorrect mailing address for Appellant and therefore did not notify him of the December 17, 2018 court date. Appellant's assertion is not supported by the record. The record reflects that the court coordinator mailed notice of the hearing to Appellant at "380 Lazy Bend Road" in Millsap, Texas. Appellant had (1) previously signed a bail bond that showed his address as "380 S. Lazy Bend Road," (2) previously filled out an indigence form on which he stated that his address was "380 Lazy Bend Est.," and (3) subsequently filled out an indigence form on which he stated that his address was "380 S. Lazy Bend Est. Rd." The notice sent by the court coordinator to Appellant was not returned to the court in the mail. Furthermore, the bail bondsman testified that he had notified Appellant of the December 17, 2018 hearing numerous times. The evidence presented at trial was sufficient for a rational jury to have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Appellant had notice of the December 17, 2018 hearing, that Appellant was aware that he was required to attend that hearing, and that Appellant failed to do so. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893, 912 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). We overrule Appellant's second issue.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
KEITH STRETCHER
JUSTICE November 13, 2020 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J. Willson, J., not participating.
Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.