Nowlin v. Texas (original by judge meyers)
Annotate this CaseAppellant was convicted of hindering apprehension after encouraging her boyfriend, Demarcus Degrate, to run from United States Marshals who were arresting him. Because the State alleged that Appellant knew that Degrate was charged with a felony, her offense was elevated to a third-degree felony, and she was sentenced to four years in prison. Appellant appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction. The court of appeals found the evidence to be sufficient and affirmed. Appellant appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals, arguing that the evidence was legally sufficient to prove that she knew Degrate was charged with a felony offense. The Court found that the evidence in this case was insufficient to support Appellant’s felony conviction. However, the State was correct in asserting that the element of knowledge that Degrate was being arrested for a felony offense was an aggravating factor and, therefore, the trial court necessarily found the essential elements of misdemeanor hindering apprehension. Therefore, the Court of Criminal Appeals reformed the judgment to reflect a conviction of misdemeanor hindering apprehension and remanded the case to the trial court to conduct a new punishment hearing.
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.