Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ex parte Floyd

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi-Edinburg

November 14, 2019

EX PARTE CHRISTOPHER FLOYD

          On appeal from the 28th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

          Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Perkes

          OPINION

          NORA L. LONGORIA JUSTICE

         This Court's memorandum opinion issued on October 10, 2019, is hereby withdrawn and the following is substituted therefor.[1]

         Appellant Christopher Floyd was indicted for several offenses, including intoxication manslaughter. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.08(B). Floyd filed an application for habeas corpus, arguing that the intoxication manslaughter charges were barred by the statute of limitations; the trial court denied habeas relief. By one issue on appeal, Floyd argues that the trial court erred in denying habeas relief. We affirm.

         I. Background

         As far as this appeal is concerned, the facts are undisputed. On May 19, 2017, Floyd was indicted (Petition One) for manslaughter, a second-degree felony, criminally negligent homicide, a state jail felony, and possession of cocaine in an amount of less than one gram, a state jail felony. See id. §§ 19.04, 19.05; Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(b). Count one, relating to manslaughter, stated:

on or about December 8, 2014, in Nueces County, Texas, [Floyd] did then and there recklessly cause the death of an individual, namely, Teresa Moody, by causing a vehicle operated by Christopher Floyd to collide with a vehicle in which Teresa Moody was an occupant, and/or causing a vehicle operated by Christopher Floyd, while Christopher Floyd was under the influence of a narcotic and/or narcotics, to collide with a vehicle in which Teresa Moody was an occupant.

         Count two was identical except it named a different victim: Faye Mosier.

         On December 14, 2017, Floyd was re-indicted (Petition Two), alleging the same offenses as Petition One but also adding the offense of intoxication manslaughter, a second-degree felony. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.08(b). Count one in Petition Two read as follows:

On or about December 8, 2014, in Nueces County, Texas, [Floyd] did then and there operate a motor vehicle in a public place while intoxicated by reason of the introduction of alcohol into his body or by reason of the introduction of a combination of alcohol and a controlled substance or substances, a drug or drugs, or a dangerous drug or drugs into his body, and did by reason of such intoxication cause the death of another, namely Teresa Moody, by accident or mistake, namely by causing a vehicle operated by Christopher Floyd to collide with a vehicle in which Teresa Moody was an occupant,

         Count two was identical except it listed Mosier as the victim.

         On July 27, 2018, Floyd filed an "Application for Habeas Corpus and Alternative Motion to Quash Indictment." Floyd asserted that the offense of intoxication manslaughter has a three-year statute of limitations. Therefore, because Petition Two was filed more than three years after the alleged offense occurred, the prosecution against him for intoxication manslaughter was barred by the statute of limitations.

         On August 2, 2018, the State re-indicted ("Petition Three") Floyd, alleging the same offenses as Petition Two, but this time including a tolling provision, claiming that the statute of limitations was tolled. On August 16, 2018, the trial court held a hearing; the trial court denied ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.