Michael Tremal Sanders v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 6th District Court of Lamar County

Annotate this Case
/**/

In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

 

______________________________

 

No. 06-05-00105-CR

______________________________

 

MICHAEL SANDERS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the 6th Judicial District Court

Lamar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20577

 

 

Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Ross

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Michael Sanders, because he believed he did not get milk for breakfast, lost his temper, beat on the walls of his cell, and threw bodily fluids and feces on three jailers who were attempting to get him under control. A jury convicted him of the offense of harassment by a person in a correctional detention facility, with one prior conviction. The jury assessed his punishment at fifteen years' imprisonment.

Sanders was tried in a single proceeding for committing the same offense against three different individuals during a single incident, Justin Foster, Sherri Halton, and Peggy Jimenez. He was convicted and was sentenced identically in each case. His sentences in these three cases were ordered to run concurrently, but the trial court ordered these punishments served consecutive to the punishment he was already serving. Sanders has filed joint briefs raising the same issues for all three appeals. In this case, the conviction for harassing Halton is at issue.

Because the issues, facts, and contentions raised in this appeal are identical to those raised in our opinion issued this day in Sanders v. State, No. 06-05-00104-CR, for the reasons stated in that opinion, we likewise resolve the issues in this appeal in favor of the State.

 

We affirm the judgment.

Donald R. Ross

Justice

 

Date Submitted: December 6, 2005

Date Decided: January 5, 2006

 

Do Not Publish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.