John Anthony Kerr v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 403rd District Court of Travis County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 03-03-00427-CR

Case Date: 03/10/2005

Plaintiff: RICARDO ACUNA

Defendant: THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 148th District Court of Nueces County

Preview:In the Matter of A.R.--Appeal from 289th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
No. 04-00-00040-CV In the Matter of A.R. From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 99-JUV-2510B Honorable Carmen Kelsey, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Tom Rickhoff, Justice Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice Alma L. L pez, Justice Sarah B. Duncan, Justice Delivered and Filed: January 17, 2001 AFFIRMED Appellant A.R was charged with the delinquent conduct of aggravated sexual assault and indecency with a child. A.R. was tried with his brother, J.O., a co-defendant, before a jury, and the jury found A.R. engaged in delinquent conduct as charged. The trial judge subsequently committed A.R. to the Texas Youth Commission. In this appeal, A.R. contends he is entitled to a new adjudication hearing because one of the jurors for his trial was disqualified under section 62.102 of the government code. Because we addressed the issue in this case in an opinion disposing of J.O.'s identical claim, we affirm the trial court's judgment in this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1. A.R. complains a juror served in his adjudication who would have been disqualified because he was not a citizen of the United States. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. 62.102 (Vernon 1998) (providing "[a] person is disqualified to serve as a petit juror unless he: . . . is a citizen of this state and of the county in which he is to serve as a juror."). We found J.O. waived his complaint about the non-citizen's service on the jury. See In re J.O., 04-00-00038-CV, slip op. at 3-4, 2000 WL 1879006, at *2 (Tex. App.-San Antonio Dec. 29, 2000 n.p.h.). J.O. neither challenged the juror for cause, nor raised disqualification in a motion for new trial. See Id. A.R. similarly failed to preserve the alleged error by a timely objection and by failing to examine the juror on his qualifications during voir dire. See id.; Mercy Hosp. of Laredo v. Rios, 776 S.W.2d 626, 628 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1989, writ denied). A.R. also argues the presence of a disqualified juror constitutes a constitutional flaw. Juror qualifications, however, are set forth in the government code, not the constitution. A.R. has failed to show any harm or prejudice which is required to warrant reversal. A.R.'s single appellate issue is overruled. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Tom Rickhoff, Justice Do Not Publish

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13544.html[8/20/2013 7:27:05 PM]

Download 13544.pdf