Kevin Carvell Myers v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 290th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Annotate this Case
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-03-00566-CR
Kevin Carvell MYERS,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2002-CR-6362
Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Paul W. Green, Justice

Sitting: Paul W. Green, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 22, 2004

AFFIRMED

Appellant Kevin Carvell Meyers was convicted of two counts of indecency with a child. Because the issue in this appeal involves the application of well-settled principles of law, we affirm the conviction in this memorandum opinion under Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

In his only issue, Meyers argues the trial court committed fundamental error during the punishment phase of the trial when the jury heard evidence that the court ordered several deputies to obtain his fingerprints by force. However, the record shows the comment of the court, "go down there and wrestle him to the ground... if you have to hold him down and 14 of you sit on him, get them" was made outside the presence of the jury. The jury heard only the finger print expert's statement that, "[p]ursuant to a court order issued by this Court, several deputies and myself went downstairs and took the defendant's fingerprints." The trial court made no comment to the jury regarding the defendant; therefore, no fundamental error occurred. See Blue v. State, 41 S.W.3d 129, 132 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157, 171 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). In the absence of fundamental error, an objection is required to preserve error. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1. Meyers did not object to the expert's statement; therefore, any error is waived. This issue is overruled.

The trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Paul W. Green, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.