Tlus lnotion cl~allellgesthe practice of cbarging a second family violence assault as a felony wl~cn there\\%IS no afinnotiw finding in the prior judgment. hsanlt is 1)pically a n1isdemeanor.1 A second assaultIII). be a third degree felony if the second offense involves fanlily~lolence and the defendant has a priorfanlily ~iolence assa~ult comic ti on.^ This issue addressed here is that the prior conviction sl~ould contaiu an"&r~native finding' of riolence against a family or household lnember in order to be properly classified as afamily violence conriction.~Pmsecutors are filing family \~iolence assaults as felo~ues eve11 wl~en there are no prior atXr111ative h~didgs.<strong>The</strong> State argues they mayprove tltc prior assault involvedfat~~ily~iole~~cethe trial of the later ofe~ise.~ Tluscourt actually lacks juristliction, it is arguably an appealable pre-th order6 <strong>The</strong> appellate courts may evenhlauyrefuse to e~~terlain Illis issue on interlocuto~). appeal.7 Ne~~ertl~eless, the matter n~ust still be raised beforetrial to avoid the risk of waiver.8 Tlus issue can also he appealed alter a negotiated plea if properly raised bypre-trial nlotion.9CAUSE NO.THB STAE OFVS.DEFENDANT# IN THF. JUDICIALDISTRICT COURT OFcoum,TExAsTO THE HOXOR4BLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT.COAIES NO\V, DDe~~dant m1t1 i\lrplicant in the :ibove-entitled and llunlbered cause, througl~ counsel,,ad files tlus Motion to Quash the Cl~arging laslmme~it and Plea to thep~risdiction in Illis cause.III support Illereof \voultl show the Courl the foUowing:1.Ih'OICThlENT MILS TO CHARGE A FELONY AiD \'EST IUKISDICTION<strong>The</strong> judga~ent of conviction alleged in the indictment does not coa~in any&nnative findings of violenceagainst a family or Ihousehokl member. (,Tee Esl~ibit "1\").'0 <strong>For</strong> a fmily violence assault to be a felon):. . . .. . ..of the j~~dg~~~ent is entered. SeeB.t.42.013, Tea. Code Crini. Proc. Am. (Supp. 2001) (fachlal hlding requiredat time of col~viction); ht. 42.01 (5), Tes. Code Crini. Proc. Ann. (Supp. 2001) (jutlg~nent should contain an)'finding "entered pursuant to Article 42.013"). <strong>The</strong> inrlictment fails to state a felony offense witl~~the jurisdictionof the district court. See Art. \: Sec. 8. TPX. CONST. (1984); )kt. 4.05, Tes, Code Crin~. Proc. Ann. (Supp.2001).11.STATE hW;1' NOT IIE-LKIGATE ISSUE OP FAMILY VIOT.ENCE.<strong>The</strong> Slate is barred from re-1itig:Uiq the issue of fa~llilyviolence by both a nlaedatory stahlte :111d col-1;lteml estoppel. See Article 42.013, Tes. Code Cri~n. Proc. Ann. (Supp. 2001) (any haling of family \-iolence"shall" be entered by the court rendering the judgnlent), AXm~ative factual findings in crin~inal caes must be~llade at llle tin~e ol ju(Ignlent and 111i1y not be ~natle later. Ex Pmte Shma, 724 S.\VZd 75, 77 (Tes. Cc App.1987) (could not make deadly weapon finding a h con\'iction, i.e. upol~ probatiol~ revocation). Because theparties and the issue i re identical to those in the prior final jndgnlent, the State is also collaterally estoppedfrom re-litigating this fact issue. See 5111 & 14111 Aae~~dments to the U.S. Collstihllioll and i\rt. I, Sec.s 9, 10,14, of ll~e Texas Constitntion ;lndikt. 1.10, Tes. Code Crilo. I'roc. Ann. (1977);Asheri. Srt,ensort, 397 U.S. 436,445 - 446,90 S.CI. 1189, 1195 - 1196,25 I..Ed Zd. 469 (1970);E~Pmte Twce,; 725 S.'X!Zd 195, 199 - 200(Tes. Cr. App. 1986).m.MUSE hlUST RE TRANSFERRE0Because the indictment cliiqes a nustlemeanor, tlus Court lacks subject mntter jurisdictio~~ ow theoffense. Art. \: Sec. 8, TU. CONST. (1984); Art. 4.05, Tes. Code Crin~. Proc. ,~III.(Supp. 2001). <strong>The</strong> Courl onlyhas jurisdictios to tlmsfer the cause to the proper court. Art. 21.26, Tex. Code Crini. Proc, 141111. (1989) (rlistrictcourt IIIIIS~ tnnsfer cause a,l~en intlictn~ent cl~ilrges ody a ~nisdenleanor); nccord~Uitche//ti. St&, 82 118 VOICE FOR THE DEFENSE WlWW.TCOLP.COM SEWEMBER ZOO1
IS.\TZd 420,423 (Tex App. -Amtin 1998, pet. r&d) (wke out of state DWI conviction did not quatrfy as pilor comictionunder statute, district co~ulonly had jurisdrction to ttmsfer cause lo n~isdenleaim court).MREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defenda~d prays Iht tile indictment be qttashed and fi~rthcr that the ause be tmnskl.red to a court vith tdsdemeanorju~isdiction.<strong>The</strong> above signature cenifies that on the - day o f ,CBRTIPICATB OF SERVICE20-, a true and correct copy of tl~e foregoing donrmeut was sent to the Stale'sAttotneyCAUSE NO.THB SATE OF TEXAS @ IN THB JUDICIAL§J'S. 5 DISTRICI' COURT OEORDER ON b1OTION TO QUASH CHARGAnG Lh'STRUhIENThVDTO lTlE JURISDIGI'IOA' OF 1WE COURTOn this day m e on to be l~eard the forcgoiug hbtion to Q11as11 Charging Instlmient and Plea to the Jurisdiction of the Court, and Ihe Court havingheard and considered the same:IT IS OllDERED that the nrotio~l is hereby:And if said hlotionis granted the Char ing h~stroment pending in said cause is hereby Quashed and transferred to thea court wit11 misdemeanor jurisdiction. 1 PSigned this -(lay of ,20-.BKIEF IN SUPPORT OF illOTION TO QUASH ANDPLEA TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COUKSI.INTRODUCTIOXTl~c Defend;~~~t chdenges the jurisdiction of this Court because the indictnlent charges only a ill is demeanor. Prior co~~riclio~~s alleged to vestfelony jurisdiction are essential elements of the offense. <strong>The</strong> jodg~nent dleged in the indictmn~t docs not co~~laie the ~~~a~~rlato~).:~tfilrnnti~~e finding offanilyviolence. Hecmse tlus faclual issue is required to be resolved at the time of the prior conviction, it IIW~ not be proved a later prosecution. Tlus Courtlacks subject matter jurisdictio~~ over llle misrlc~~~eanor offense cllargetl in the indiclmet~t.11.OFFEXSE CHt\RGEDa. Reonirements of Felony AssaultTile indict~nent in this case altenlpts to cllarge a felony offelm under Scc. 22.01, Tes. Penal Code Ann. (Supp. 2001). That statute provides, io relcvantpart, zs follo\vs:",(b) An otfense under Subsection (a) (I) is a Class A mistle~neanor, except ti~athe offense is a felony of the tl~ir degree if the offense is commitledagainst:(2) a n~e~nber of tile defe~~dant's fmily or llousehold, if it is shown on the trial of the offense tllat the tlefel~cla~~l ilas been previously conrlcledof an offense against a member of the defendant's faniig or housel~old under this seclion.(e) 711 Illis sectiow(I) "Fas~ily" has tile me;u~ing assigned by Section 71.003, Failllily Code.(2) "Household" has li~e nleaning assigned by Seclio~l 71.005, Palnily Code. Id, hsa~~lt is ortli~larily a ~~~istle~~~eanor. Id i\ fa11uIy violenceassault call be a felo~~y within the district court's j~~risdictio~~ only if the i~~dicto~ent allcgcs a qualiI)ing prior cowiction. Id.SEPTEMBER 2001 \nrWW.TCDLA.COM VOICE FOR THE DEFENSE 19