Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
WILLIAM SOLOMON LEWIS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS
OPINION
Appellant was convicted of retaliation. The court of appeals held the evidence legally insufficient and rendered a judgment of acquittal. Lewis v. State, 672 S.W.3d 541 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2023). Appellant filed a motion for bond. Tex. Crim. App. 44.04(h). The court of appeals granted appellant bond in the amount of $120,000, pending appeal. The State filed a petition for discretionary review which the Court granted.
The State then filed a motion asking this Court to find the amount of bail set by the court of appeals insufficient. On January 31, 2024, the Court issued an opinion on the State's motion, raising the amount of bond set by the court of appeals to $500,000. Lewis v. State, PD-0564-23 slip op. (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 31, 2024).
Appellant filed a “motion for reconsideration” asking the Court to reconsider its holding and allow appellant to continue on the bond previously set by the court of appeals. Appellant attached to his motion a copy of a document suggesting that appellant may have violated his conditions of bond. The Court has since confirmed that, according to documents filed in the trial court, on February 1, 2024, the State detected that an attempt was made to tamper with appellant's GPS monitoring device. Appellant's device was found on February 5. On February 6, the trial court ordered an alias capias for appellant's arrest, effectively revoking or suspending his bond.
Because the trial court's order for appellant's arrest effectively suspended his bond before the mandate issued on this Court's opinion resetting the amount of the bond, the Court's opinion is moot. Cf. Danziger v. State, 786 S.W.2d 723 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (dismissing petition for discretionary review upon finding applicant's contentions pertaining to pretrial confinement due to denial of bail moot where applicant was convicted and confined for life); see also Jack v. State, 149 S.W.3d 119, 123 n.10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004)(“A case becomes moot on appeal when the judgment of the appellate court can no longer have an effect on an existing controversy or cannot affect the rights of the parties”).
We deny appellant's motion for reconsideration, deny the State's motion for sufficient bail, and withdraw our January 31, 2024 opinion.
Per curiam.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: NO. PD-0564-23
Decided: April 17, 2024
Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)