Ramon Rios, III v. the State of Texas ( 2021 )

Order, Concurring Opinion on Denial of En Banc Relief, and Dissenting
Opinions from Denial of En Banc Relief filed August 3, 2021.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-18-00886-CR
RAMON RIOS, III, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 232nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1491213
DISSENTING OPINION FROM DENIAL OF
EN BANC RECONSIDERATION
I respectfully dissent from this court’s denial of en banc reconsideration and
join Section A of Justice Hassan’s dissent in that the officers in this case failed to
articulate specific and articulable facts upon which they could have reasonably
believed that anyone other than Rios was present inside the house or that anyone
concealed posed a danger to their safety. Absent such facts, the protective sweep
in this case was unreasonable and invalid under the Fourth Amendment. See
Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325, 334 (1990); Reasor v. State, 12 S.W.3d 813, 816–
17 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).
I also agree with Section B.1 of Justice Hassan’s dissent that the officers
therefore did not have a legitimate reason to be present in the house, negating the
majority’s opinion that the drugs found during the initial search were in plain view.
See Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 375 (1993) (citations omitted); Ramos
v. State, 934 S.W.2d 358, 365 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1198(1997) (citing State v. Haley, 811 S.W.2d 597, 599 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Stoker
v. State, 788 S.W.2d 1, 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 951(1990)).
/s/ Margaret “Meg” Poissant
Justice
En Banc Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise, Jewell,
Bourliot, Zimmerer, Spain, Hassan, Poissant, and Wilson. (Hassan, J., dissenting,
joined, in part, by Poissant, J.).
Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2