In Re Commitment of Freddie Lee Schmidt--Appeal from 435th District Court of Montgomery County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-10-00149-CV ____________________ IN RE COMMITMENT OF FREDDIE LEE SCHMIDT On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 09-07-06722-CV MEMORANDUM OPINION The State of Texas filed a petition to civilly commit Freddie Lee Schmidt as a sexually violent predator under the Sexually Violent Predator Act. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 841.001-.150 (West 2010). A jury found Schmidt suffers from a behavioral abnormality that predisposes him to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence. Id. § 841.003. The trial court entered final judgment and an order of civil commitment under the Act. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Following a trial, the jury answered yes to the following question: Do you find beyond a reasonable doubt that FREDDIE LEE SCHMIDT suffers from a behavioral 1 abnormality that predisposes him to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence? On appeal, Schmidt argues that the trial court erred when it overruled his request to word the sole question presented to the jury as follows: Do you find beyond a reasonable doubt that FREDDIE LEE SCHMIDT suffers from a behavioral abnormality that makes it likely for him to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence? Specifically, Schmidt argues that the word likely should have been submitted instead of the word predisposes. The State argues in part that Schmidt failed to preserve his issue for review. The following exchange took place during the charge conference: THE COURT: Okay. How about Defense, have you had adequate time to look at the proposed Court s jury charge? [Defense Counsel]: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: And do you have any objections to it? [Defense Counsel]: The only objection I would have would be the likely, but I know how the Court is on that, so we ll waive that objection. THE COURT: Well, and, you know, we put the definition of behavior abnormality in here which has predisposes. So it seems to me that when it was changed by Judge Reiter who put predisposes in the question, he wanted it to mirror the definition. So that s why we re sticking with that. [Defense Counsel]: Yes. My understanding is at some point somebody in my office wanted it to be predisposes, and it was changed from likely to predisposes. I know it s kind of -THE COURT: Right. Now you want to go back the other way? [Defense Counsel]: I am not responsible for the sins of my 2 ancestors. THE COURT: Well, none of us are; but because the -- and it makes sense to me that the word predisposes is in there because in the wording where we define behavior abnormality for the jury it s got predisposes in there. So I d like to keep it consistent, and I m going to overrule that objection. To preserve a complaint for appellate review, the record must show . . . the complaint was made to the trial court by a timely request, objection, or motion that . . . stated the grounds for the ruling that the complaining party sought from the trial court with sufficient specificity to make the trial court aware of the complaint. . . . Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a)(1)(A). When objecting to a jury charge, a party must point out distinctly the objectionable matter and the grounds of the objection. Ford Motor Co. v. Ledesma, 242 S.W.3d 32, 43 (Tex. 2007) (quoting Tex. R. Civ. P. 274). Preservation of error generally depends on whether the party made the trial court aware of the complaint, timely and plainly, and obtained a ruling. Id. (quoting State Dep t of Highways & Pub. Transp. v. Payne, 838 S.W.2d 235, 241 (Tex. 1992)); see also In re B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d 340, 349 (Tex. 2003). The Texas Supreme Court has stated that [a] party should not be permitted to waive, consent to, or neglect to complain about an error at trial and then surprise his opponent on appeal by stating his complaint for the first time. B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d at 350 (quoting Pirtle v. Gregory, 629 S.W.2d 919, 920 (Tex. 1982) (per curiam)). Jury charge error is not preserved when a party waives, or invites, the alleged error by 3 acquiescing to submitting a theory and then complains that such submission is error on appeal. C.M. Asfahl Agency v. Tensor, Inc., 135 S.W.3d 768, 785 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.). Likewise, a party waives claimed error in the charge when that party proposes to submit a substantially similar charge to the jury. Id.; see also S & A Beverage Co. of Beaumont, No. 2 v. DeRouen, 753 S.W.2d 507, 510 (Tex. App. Beaumont 1988, writ denied) ( A party cannot complain on appeal when the issues or instructions given the jury are substantially the same as those requested by appellants. ). In the present case, Schmidt s counsel expressly waived the objection to the use of the word predisposes during the charge conference. In addition, the proposed jury charge submitted by Schmidt also used the term predisposes[,] as opposed to the term likely. Significantly, the proposed question submitted by Schmidt is identical to the question that the trial court submitted to the jury in the charge. Under these circumstances we find that Schmidt failed to preserve error. See C.M. Asfahl Agency, 135 S.W.3d at 785; DeRouen, 753 S.W.2d at 510; see also Cont l Cas. Co. v. Thomas, 463 S.W.2d 501, 503-04 (Tex. Civ. App. Beaumont 1971, no writ) (finding error not preserved where defendant requested the issues complained of on appeal in the exact form that they were submitted to the jury). Having overruled Schmidt s sole issue on appeal, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. AFFIRMED. 4 ________________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on January 24, 2011 Opinion Delivered February 24, 2011 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 5
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.
