Joseph, Lester Charles v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 253rd District Court of Chambers County

Affirmed and Opinion filed September 28, 2004.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-03-01078-CR

______________________

LESTER CHARLES JOSEPH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 253rd District Court

Chambers County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11,416

O P I N I O N

Appellant, Lester Charles Joseph, pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, namely cocaine, with intent to deliver. In accordance with appellant=s plea bargain, the trial court assessed his punishment at 15 years= imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. In his sole point of error, appellant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We affirm.

On May 10, 2000, Pablo Chavez, a trooper with the Texas Department of Public Safety, observed appellant make an illegal lane change. While conducting the traffic stop, Chavez noticed that appellant seemed nervous and was shaking. Without being asked, appellant explained to Chavez that he was coming from Ben Taub Hospital where he had been visiting his sister, Wilma. Further investigation revealed the car was rented. Taking note of appellant=s passenger, Chavez asked appellant about the other occupant of his automobile. Appellant said the passenger was his cousin. Chavez then proceeded to question the passenger, who told the trooper he was appellant=s Abuddy.@ Chavez observed the passenger also seemed nervous and would not make eye contact with him. Chavez then asked the passenger for the name of appellant=s sister, and he hesitantly replied ADarlene.@ After the passenger made several more responses which directly conflicted with appellant=s story, Chavez ran a background check on appellant. When Chavez discovered that appellant had been less than candid regarding his criminal background, Chavez asked if he could search the vehicle. Appellant unequivocally gave his consent for a search. During the search, Chavez found cocaine located in the vehicle=s center console.

In his sole point of error, appellant seems to contend that the search was improper because it was not supported by probable cause. However, appellant does not challenge the validity of the initial traffic stop. Chavez testified that he observed appellant change lanes without signaling. Such conduct constitutes a criminal offense, and appellant does not argue otherwise. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. ' 545.104 (Vernon 1999). Rather, appellant contends Trooper Chavez had no probable cause to believe there was contraband in the vehicle and, therefore, he was not authorized to seek consent to search. However, a police officer may, without any probable cause or reasonable suspicion, approach a citizen and ask him for permission to search his automobile. James v. State, 102 S.W.3d 162, 173 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 2003, pet. ref=d). In fact, consent to search is a well established exception to the warrant and probable cause requirements of the Fourth Amendment and Article I, section 9 of the Texas Constitution. Corpus v. State, 30 S.W.3d 35, 39 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref=d).

Accordingly, appellant=s sole point of error is overruled, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

/s/ J. Harvey Hudson

Justice

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed September 28, 2004.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Hudson and Fowler.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).