| CCA Case No. |
Defendant's Name |
Case Citation |
(What Was Granted?)(Date Granted)(County) Issue(s) Granted |
| PD-0212-15 | Chris Furr | None 13-14-00287-CR |
Appellant's 06/10/2015 Nueces / Possession of Controlled Substance Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that, under its view of Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), an anonymous tip that a unidentified pedestrian is doing drugs near a homeless shelter, without more, is sufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of a pedestrian the police find near that location? |
| PD-0019-15 PD-0020-15 PD-0021-15 PD-0022-15 |
Albert Hill | None 05-13-00421-CR 05-13-00423-CR 05-13-00424-CR 05-13-00425-CR |
Appellee's 06/10/2015 Dallas / Making False Statement and Securing Document by Deception To establish a prima facie case of selective prosecution in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, and to obtain a hearing under the "presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness" method, a defendant must provide "some evidence" that shows: (1) the government singled out the defendant for prosecution and has not proceeded against others similarly situated based on the type of conduct for which the defendant is charged; and (2) the government's discriminatory selection is invidious. Once the defendant makes this showing, the burden shifts to the State to justify the discriminatory treatment. Appellee asks this Court to clarify what constitutes "some evidence" and find that so long as a defendant attaches a proffer of evidence to a motion to dismiss due to prosecutorial misconduct that the trial court in its discretion determines to be a colorable claim of a constitutional violation, the defendant has attached "some evidence," and a trial court should be permitted to conduct a hearing on the motion to dismiss. Appellee not only attached "some evidence" showing a constitutional violation, but in fact attached "exceptionally clear evidence." As a result, the Court of Appeals erred when it: (1) sustained the State's second issue and concluded that Appellee "did not make the proper showing sufficient to establish a prima facie case..." of the fact that the former elected district attorney of Dallas County engaged in prosecutorial misconduct by allowing himself to be corruptly influenced by Blue in return for indicting Appellee; (2) found that the trial court erred in conducting a hearing on Appellee's motion to dismiss based upon prosecutorial misconduct; (3) vacated the trial court's Order Granting Motion to Dismiss; and (4) remanded the case to the trial court to reinstate the indictments against Appellee. |