Gary Carson v. The State of Texas Appeal from 102nd District Court of Bowie County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-15-00171-CR GARY CARSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 102nd District Court Bowie County, Texas Trial Court No. 14F0103-102 Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Moseley,* JJ. Memorandum Opinion on Remand by Chief Justice Morriss ________________________ *Bailey C. Moseley, Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment MEMORANDUM OPINION ON REMAND Gary Carson was convicted on open guilty pleas in the 102nd Judicial District Court in Bowie County, Texas, of three counts 1 of assault on public servants who were performing public servant duties (TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.01(b)(1) (West Supp. 2018)), the penalties being enhanced by previous convictions (TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.425 (West Supp. 2018)), and three counts of bail jumping (TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.10 (West 2016)). Carson v. State, 515 S.W.3d 372, 374 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2017), rev’d, Carson v.State, Nos. PD-0205-17, PD0206-17, PD-0207-17, PD-0208-17, 2018 WL 4472228, at *5 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 19, 2018). Carson executed a written waiver of his right to appeal, and after a trial on punishment, the trial court sentenced him to fifty years’ imprisonment in each of the assault cases and ten years’ imprisonment on each count of the bail jumping. 2 Id. This Court reversed and remanded the case for a new trial on punishment, having found that Carson’s waiver of appeals was invalid and that fundamental error was committed at sentencing. Id. at 385–86. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals found that Carson’s waiver was valid, reversed our judgment, and remanded the case to this Court for consideration of Carson’s heretofore unaddressed argument. 1 The charges were made through four separate indictments. Carson has filed a single brief raising the same issues in all four cases. We reach the same result in the other three cases, released today in separate opinions in cause numbers 06-15-00170-CR, 06-15-00172-CR, and 06-15-00173-CR. 2 The assault charges were enhanced by two prior felony convictions, to which Carson pled true. The fifty-year sentences were to run concurrently to each other, and the ten-year sentences were to run concurrently to each other, but consecutively to the fifty-year sentences. 2 Here, Carson appeals from his conviction for assaulting Officer Shawn Jacobs. He contends that despite the waiver, he may still appeal his conviction under the Young exception.3 Carson, 2018 WL 4472228, at *5. We addressed this issue in detail in our opinion of this date on Carson’s appeal in cause number 06-15-00170-CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise overrule Carson’s point of error here. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: October 25, 2018 January 9, 2019 Do Not Publish 3 Because the underlying facts of the case have been discussed in detail in our prior opinion in this case, we address only those facts relevant to the point of error presented on remand. 3
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.
