Ronnie Lee Delp, Jr v. State ( 2014 )

AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed February 26, 2014.
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-13-01488-CR
RONNIE LEE DELP, JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F11-31504-L
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Moseley, Francis, and Lang
Opinion by Justice Lang
Ronnie Lee Delp, Jr. appeals his conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and render
judgment. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Appellant waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a
baseball bat. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a) (West 2011). The trial court deferred
adjudicating guilt, placed appellant on three years’ community supervision, and assessed a
$2,500 fine. The State later moved to adjudicate guilt, alleging appellant violated the conditions
of his community supervision. Appellant pleaded true to the allegations in a hearing on the
motion. The trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed
punishment at three years’ imprisonment.
In his sole issue, appellant contends the Criminal District Court No. 5 lacked jurisdiction
over the case because it was not properly transferred to the court’s docket. Because the
indictment was returned in the Criminal District Court No. 6, and the record contains no order
transferring the case to the Criminal District Court No. 5 where the case was heard and the
judgment was rendered, the trial court did not have jurisdiction over the case. The State
responds Criminal District Court No. 5 always had jurisdiction over the case and no transfer
order was necessary.
A grand jury formed and impaneled by a district judge inquires into offenses liable to
indictment and hears testimony before voting on whether to induct an accused. TEX. CODE
CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 20.09, 20.19 (West 2005); Ex parte Edone, 740 S.W.2d 446, 448 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1987). After the conclusion of testimony, the grand jury votes “as to the presentment
of an indictment.” TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 20.19. Following presentment, an
indictment is filed in a court with competent jurisdiction, i.e., jurisdiction to hear the case. See
Hultin v. State, 171 Tex. Crim. 425, 351 S.W.2d 248, 255 (1961).
In counties having two or more district courts, the judges of the court may adopt rules
governing the filing, numbering, and assignment of cases for trial, and the distribution of the
courts’ work they consider necessary or desirable to conduct the business of the courts. See TEX.
GOV’T CODE ANN. § 24.304 (West 2004); see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 74.093 (West 2013)
(addressing adoption of local rules of administration to provide, in part, for assignment,
docketing, transfer, and hearing of all cases). Thus, a specific district court may impanel a grand
-2-
jury, but it does not necessarily follow that all cases returned by that grand jury are assigned to
that court. See Bourque v. State, 156 S.W.3d 675, 678 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, pet. ref’d).
While the record shows the grand jury that returned the indictment was presided over by
the Criminal District Court No. 6, the case was thereafter filed in the Criminal District Court No.
5. We take judicial notice that both of these courts are located in Dallas County. Nothing in the
record shows the case was ever filed or appeared on the trial docket of Criminal District Court
No. 6. Because the Criminal District Court No. 5 had jurisdiction to hear appellant’s case and
render the judgment, we resolve appellant’s sole issue against him.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
/ Douglas S. Lang/
DOUGLAS S. LANG
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
131488F.U05
-3-
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
RONNIE LEE DELP, JR., Appellant Appeal from the Criminal District Court
No. 5 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No.
No. 05-13-01488-CR V. F11-31504-L).
Opinion delivered by Justice Lang, Justices
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Moseley and Francis participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered February 26, 2014.
/ Douglas S. Lang/
DOUGLAS S. LANG
JUSTICE
-4-