GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 Aug 2014 - Enrique Arochi kidnapping trial #6

[CuriousinNY]

I think the judge may be more lenient than a jury because I think anyone gets a little desensitized when they are surrounded by criminals due to their profession. I have sure the judge has seen many kidnappers and murderers come thru his courtroom. As a juror, this hopefully be the one and only time they are placed in the path of such an evil person. I hope this makes sense!

 

[RosemountGAL]

Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 3h3 hours ago
.@xxxxHe is a fair judge who makes decisions based on the facts in the case #arochitrial


Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 3h3 hours ago
.@xxxx Christina Morris' family was here in court today. They aren't commenting to media #arochitrial


Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 3h3 hours ago
.@xxxx Yes, there will be victim impact statements after the sentence is issued #arochitrial

This is my question. He is going to base his decision on the facts/evidence presented during the trial.. BUT the jurors were going to here more evidence presented to them by the state for sentencing so why WOULDN'T the state continue to do so to the Judge? Can he make a decision based on information he has that WAS NOT presented in the case? That doesn't sound legal.. Or maybe I'm just really dumb when it comes to the law...

 

[RosemountGAL]

I do not pretend to know Texas law. I thought the judge did an outstanding job in this case of keeping controls. He was very genuine about keeping the time commitments of the jury. He seemed sincere in his apologies for his illness and car trouble yesterday. So why delay until Friday? He could have simply given his verdict today or tomorrow, unless he wanted to review the case.

Also, why would the prosecution and defense get a chance to speak to the jury. The judge predicted a day and a half of testimony. Why don't this get this opportunity just because the sentencing has been switched to a judge?

And is this common? I would think in the beginning when he made his choice for jury punishment, he would have to stick with it. Could it have gone the other way? If he had selected judge, could he have switched to jury punishment?

That is my thought process also...

 

[arkansasmimi]

:thinking:
Curious as to how Judge vs Jury choosing the sentencing verdict goes as far as Appeal turnovers? Judges decisions on various motions/objections so forth (stuff that the Def got put on record) and then the same Judge hands down sentencing.

JMHO the Judge will be fair (seems fair at trial from what I can tell by tweets and closing statements) and not over the top, but a stiff sentence. Judge also knows the back stories of stuff and the possibilities of whether a murder trial may or may not ever happen. Unless there is a body and someone else being a co defendant I don't see the State going through another the expensive trial for that. Especially if the Judge gives a stiff sentence (one that a lesser murder charge might have been). JMHO Without a body, this is their next best thing.

Curious what the sentencing time for Agg Kidnapping that this Judge has imposed in other cases.

ETA:

TYPICAL AGGRAVATED KIDNAPPING SENTENCE
According to data compiled by the Texas Tribune, most individuals convicted of aggravated kidnapping serve sentences greater than 40 years in length. https://www.versustexas.com/criminal/state-crimes/felonies/aggravated-kidnapping/

 

[TCMom]

With choosing a jury first he had someone hearing the case with fresh unbiased eyes and ears. *Not saying the Judge is not unbiased, he is supposed to be by law. But he already knows the case which should help move phase 2 along faster*. So they took a chance with the jury. The State got a Guilty verdict but it was not a slam dunk and the jury had to work at getting that. The sentencing was going to be much more evidence and testimony that could not be presented in the phase 1. As I posted JMHO prior having the jury hear some of the evidence possibly presented could harm the December case he has to still go forth with. Judge already has seen that evidence. State will say something about it as to get it on the record. JMHO but not as much as possibly would have in front of a jury.

Reporter VW tweeted a reply that Judge did not give reason why Friday. But there is still a phase 2 of the case to present and he was not feeling well so could be another reason for waiting. It not like the Judge could just impose sentencing today without that part. JMHO I feel pretty sure that prior to getting on the bench this morning the Judge was well aware by State and Def that they were changing the choice of Judge instead of jury. We can only speculate as to why Friday.

To my knowledge, there will be no phase 2 to present. The Judge has already heard all of the evidence that the state would present in hearings outside the jury presence or before trial - which is how it got barred from phase 1. No reason to present anything else.

 

[arkansasmimi]

In Texas, the defendant can be convicted of the higher crime of aggravated kidnapping if he or she has committed a kidnapping and had the intent to do one of the following:

Hold the victim for a ransom or reward;
Use the victim as a shield or hostage;
Aid in the commission of a felony or an escape after committing the felony;
Inflict bodily injury on the victim or sexually violate or abuse the victim;
Terrorize the victim or another person;
Interfere with the performance of any governmental or political function;
Uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the crime.

Defenses to Kidnapping Charges
The defendant voluntarily released the victim in a safe place (NOTE: This is only a partial defense and may only result in the decrease of the penalty and charge by one degree.)
Lack of intent to use deadly force
Lack of knowledge
The defendant is a relative of the victim
The defendant's only intent was to gain lawful control of the victim

Penalties and Sentences
Texas kidnapping laws classify the crime as a third degree felony. This carries a penalty of two to ten years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. If the crime is elevated to aggravated kidnapping, the defendant will be charged with a first degree felony. This carries a penalty of five to ninety-nine years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. This penalty may be reduced to being a second degree felony if at the punishment stage of the trial, the defendant can show through the evidence that he or she voluntarily released the victim in a safe place. If that defense succeeds, the penalty imposed may be two to twenty years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/texas-kidnapping-laws.html

 

[arkansasmimi]

Quote Originally Posted by arkansasmimi View Post
With choosing a jury first he had someone hearing the case with fresh unbiased eyes and ears. *Not saying the Judge is not unbiased, he is supposed to be by law. But he already knows the case which should help move phase 2 along faster*. So they took a chance with the jury. The State got a Guilty verdict but it was not a slam dunk and the jury had to work at getting that. The sentencing was going to be much more evidence and testimony that could not be presented in the phase 1. As I posted JMHO prior having the jury hear some of the evidence possibly presented could harm the December case he has to still go forth with. Judge already has seen that evidence. State will say something about it as to get it on the record. JMHO but not as much as possibly would have in front of a jury.

Reporter VW tweeted a reply that Judge did not give reason why Friday. But there is still a phase 2 of the case to present and he was not feeling well so could be another reason for waiting. It not like the Judge could just impose sentencing today without that part. JMHO I feel pretty sure that prior to getting on the bench this morning the Judge was well aware by State and Def that they were changing the choice of Judge instead of jury. We can only speculate as to why Friday.

To my knowledge, there will be no phase 2 to present. The Judge has already heard all of the evidence that the state would present in hearings outside the jury presence or before trial - which is how it got barred from phase 1. No reason to present anything else.

JMHO Phase 1 is the Guilt/Innocence phase, Phase 2 is Sentencing. I honestly do not know what will be presented as far as evidence/testimony. I know that VW tweeted that there will be victim impact statements and these 2 replies below. I agree would make sense not to have any other evidence presented. Unless there something that EA wants to say? (d) again, to me one would think if he had anything would have presented along time ago. But prior with jury she tweeted opening statements, other evidence, testimony, victim impact, closing and then the jury would deliberate. JMHO it will be somewhat the same but not all the evidence that the State would present to jury (that Judge has seen and ruled on) but otherwise same. Not just the Judge saying ok stand up EA this is your sentence. JMHO maybe Minor#4 or Quailfoot the attorneys that have given legal info during trial will weigh in. TIA if so.

Valerie Wigglesworth ‏@vlwigg 6h6 hours ago
Jury trial waiver approved. Jury is headed back into courtroom to get the news #arochitrial

@vlwigg does this mean there won't be any more testimony?

Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 5h5 hours ago
.@XXXX Not sure. Attorneys will have the option of presenting more testimony/evidence at Friday's hearing. #arochitrial
******

Valerie Wigglesworth ‏@vlwigg 6h6 hours ago
"Your job's done," Rusch tells jurors. #arochitrial

@vlwigg So does the prosecution not present anything now for the judge to consider for sentencing? Or does that process continue?

Valerie WigglesworthVerified account ‏@vlwigg 5h5 hours ago
.@*advertiser censored* Judge will consider everything presented in case so far. Attorneys may also bring testimony/evidence on Friday. #arochitrial

ETA another tweet from story at link
Chris Sadeghi @chrissadeghi
Judge Rusch says he'll consider testimony from guilt/innocence as well as hearing on Friday. Will chose term between 5-99 yrs. #arochitrial
9:37 AM - 27 Sep 2016 http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/coll...mine-arochis-prison-sentence-friday/326866306

 

[arkansasmimi]

[video=twitter;780870179852988416]https://twitter.com/AliceBarrNBC5/status/780870179852988416[/video]

 

[arkansasmimi]

Dan Haggerty ‏@HaggertyCBS11 & Alice Barr ‏@AliceBarrNBC5 both so far have done interview with Juror #1 (unsure if this is 1st to speak/interview or their actual juror #)

 

[Gigglingtoes]

In Texas, the defendant can be convicted of the higher crime of aggravated kidnapping if he or she has committed a kidnapping and had the intent to do one of the following:

Hold the victim for a ransom or reward;
Use the victim as a shield or hostage;
Aid in the commission of a felony or an escape after committing the felony;
Inflict bodily injury on the victim or sexually violate or abuse the victim;
Terrorize the victim or another person;
Interfere with the performance of any governmental or political function;
Uses or exhibits a deadly weapon during the crime.

Defenses to Kidnapping Charges
The defendant voluntarily released the victim in a safe place (NOTE: This is only a partial defense and may only result in the decrease of the penalty and charge by one degree.)
Lack of intent to use deadly force
Lack of knowledge
The defendant is a relative of the victim
The defendant's only intent was to gain lawful control of the victim

Penalties and Sentences
Texas kidnapping laws classify the crime as a third degree felony. This carries a penalty of two to ten years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. If the crime is elevated to aggravated kidnapping, the defendant will be charged with a first degree felony. This carries a penalty of five to ninety-nine years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. This penalty may be reduced to being a second degree felony if at the punishment stage of the trial, the defendant can show through the evidence that he or she voluntarily released the victim in a safe place. If that defense succeeds, the penalty imposed may be two to twenty years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000. http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/texas-kidnapping-laws.html

Mimi are you the google attorney? lol

 

[SteveS]

What makes you think the judge won't be so harsh?

I answered this much earlier, but here goes again.

The judge will weigh things like precedent of similar sentences, and what is least likely to be overturned (on the grounds of being somehow unjust).

OTOH, the jury would blow right past all that (and also be given wider latitude because it's a jury, with 12 opinions being reflected) and give EA what they think is deserved for an abduction in which the victim is never seen or heard from again, with a likelihood of sexual assault (rape) and/or bodily injury (aka murder, given her permanent disappearance) in their minds, which would put them at or close to the max end of the scale.

Since I wrote the above much earlier, one or more jurors have revealed they and others would have favored 99 years, so my appraisal of how they would think was accurate.

That's not to say that the judge WON'T give him 99 years. It's certainly possible. This is the max type of that particular crime, where the victim is never seen again and the perp has done nothing to mitigate (ie lessen) the harm he caused while also doing everything possible to mislead and lie to LE. So if the state meant for the 99 years to be used, this certainly fits. I think his refusal to tell her family what happened to CM has to be a factor for more years as well. But the judge will first feel compelled to look at other cases and sentences and consider if 90 years or 80 years or less is fairer, rather than blindly putting the hammer down - imo the jury would feel no such restraint.

 

[SteveS]

As to all the questions about "what about the evidence that was going to be presented to the jury in the punishment phase of the trial" -

The same procedure is followed when the judge is deciding the sentence, as would have happened with the jury. The state will still have the ability to present in open court all the issues and factors that they think should impact the length of sentence, including past criminal acts, uncharged criminal acts, pending criminal acts, character, and really about anything that they think bears on the issue. The defense will have the same opportunity, but of course in their case will present all the things they think should lead to a lesser sentence. The family can also be asked to testify in the punishment phase, such as to the actions of the defendant, and in relation to his character and the like, but their focus would have to be more on what EA did and less on how that made them feel.

At the end, the judge will weigh what he has heard, in conjunction with what he has heard in the guilt-innocence phase as well, and render a decision.

Victim impact statements (which are the family's opportunity to force EA to hear a piece of their mind, with no holds barred verbally) are possible, but follow the decision, so are not considered in the decision. So the family may speak multiple times.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Mimi are you the google attorney? lol

:laughing: Nope lol nor do I try to play one on WS or tv just like to read and try to understand and read/research some more. I post links because that is what my understanding of WS rules, is we are suppose to do unless just our opinion. Or we are a VI. Since I have not gone to law school, it is not my opinion and I do not wish to plagiarize someone else's work. Giving a link as to why or what helped form my opinion gives someone else opportunity to read for themselves. Not just take someones word as fact. I have seen it posted on various threads comments that argue that xx can not happen as a fact- with no link back up. Yet when statutes says different, and later learn xx could and did happen. Again as the statutes said. We all have option to believe or disbelieve anything anyone posts. Again I post allowed links and/or backup as much as possible. Many case threads will show that you don't really know what will be the outcome til the actual outcome. JMHO

ETA but Google can be your friend

 

[SteveS]

I would think in the beginning when he made his choice for jury punishment, he would have to stick with it. Could it have gone the other way? If he had selected judge, could he have switched to jury punishment?

"I would think in the beginning when he made his choice for jury punishment, he would have to stick with it." .... That's simply how the law is written. It specifies that if the defendant has exercised the legal right to a trial by jury, and before the prospective jurors are questioned in the "voir dire" process also specified that the jury will decide their punishment if they are found guilty, then if he is found guilty, he will get a chance to reverse that decision and opt for a judge.

"Could it have gone the other way? If he had selected judge, could he have switched to jury punishment".... No. Once it is in the hands of a judge rather than jury, it stays that way.

 

[SteveS]

As I posted JMHO prior having the jury hear some of the evidence possibly presented could harm the December case he has to still go forth with. Judge already has seen that evidence. State will say something about it as to get it on the record. JMHO but not as much as possibly would have in front of a jury.

Regarding EA's upcoming "Sexual Assault of a Minor" trial, the idea that the state would somehow present it halfway to the judge on Friday is EXTREMELY unlikely.

It's really an all-or-nothing choice imo.

Here's why. If the state wants to have that crime weighed in this case, since it hasn't already been decided by a court, they have to present compelling evidence with a BARD standard. And the defense can and will be able to cross-examine the witnesses that offer such evidence, and offer their own evidence as well. So the state's choice will be to either play almost all their cards here, and give the defense an advance look, or simply not go there at all.

However, I think they will opt to add it to Friday's pile for a couple reasons.
(1) The defense already knows the evidence for that trial anyhow ...it's not like any of it was going to be a surprise.
(2) Friday may be the state's ONLY true chance to tack on extra years for EA to serve.
...They have to face the possibility that a later conviction on SAoaM might simply be punished on a "concurrent" basis rather than a consecutive one. A later court makes that choice, and that's often how courts do it when trying an already-incarcerated-for-foreverish defendant. OTOH, if that crime is spotlighted now, in the same arena as an AK, and the evidence is considered compelling, it might give the judge a valid and additional legal reason to max out the length of the sentence, based on EA being such an ongoing menace to society.

 

[Steleheart]

I answered this much earlier, but here goes again.

The judge will weigh things like precedent of similar sentences, and what is least likely to be overturned (on the grounds of being somehow unjust).

OTOH, the jury would blow right past all that (and also be given wider latitude because it's a jury, with 12 opinions being reflected) and give EA what they think is deserved for an abduction in which the victim is never seen or heard from again, with a likelihood of sexual assault (rape) and/or bodily injury (aka murder, given her permanent disappearance) in their minds, which would put them at or close to the max end of the scale.

Since I wrote the above much earlier, one or more jurors have revealed they and others would have favored 99 years, so my appraisal of how they would think was accurate.

That's not to say that the judge WON'T give him 99 years. It's certainly possible. This is the max type of that particular crime, where the victim is never seen again and the perp has done nothing to mitigate (ie lessen) the harm he caused while also doing everything possible to mislead and lie to LE. So if the state meant for the 99 years to be used, this certainly fits. I think his refusal to tell her family what happened to CM has to be a factor for more years as well. But the judge will first feel compelled to look at other cases and sentences and consider if 90 years or 80 years or less is fairer, rather than blindly putting the hammer down - imo the jury would feel no such restraint.

So wondering out loud here; No matter how many years he gets for the AK, that gives LE much more time to find her and that would make him subject to the DP on a murder charge. If he were to now reveal ( the location of CM) could he base that on taking the DP off and then plead to murder with the same sentence concurrent? That would be no harm, no foul, nothing lost but gained would be no DP.

Would that be beneficial to EA or would it jeopardize any future appeals?

 

[SteveS]

Steleheart, I'll lay out the alternatives, but you may know most or all of this already.
1 EA is subject to a murder charge with DP possible already, body or no body. The AK conviction is major evidence for such a trial, and would be part of the starting facts, and then combined with the fact she has never been seen since.
2 Not finding her body wouldn't be a Get Out of Jail Free card for a killer who successfully disposes of a body. But it's true that finding her body would make it somewhat easier to convict for murder
3 Time passing also is evidence that helps persuade a jury that she must be dead. Legally you can declare someone dead after they've been missing for a number of years. (But, it's legally possible to get such a presumption sooner, according to the circumstances of the disappearance.)
4 As you note, with EA locked away in the pen, the state can let the passing years with no CM provide added proof that he murdered her.
5 So while he's in prison, their ability to try him for murder and DP will be relentlessly hanging over EA's head.
6 But if he's sent away forever or so, the state may decide that's good enough and never try him for murder, especially if he's never getting out of prison.
7 An offer to swap location info for some sort of limit on punishment is a negotiation, so literally either side can offer whatever they want to offer, apart from crimes already adjudicated.
...So, for example, he could reveal her location with the condition that he gets immunity from any additional charges re CM.
8 Obviously in any negotiated sentence the state would make a "confession" about CM one of the pieces that would have to be included (which then removes possibility for appeal).
9 Appealing the AK and somehow getting a shorter sentence could be a two-edged sword, in that it would get him out of prison sooner, but would also make it more likely that the state would want to come back and put his life on the line in a murder trial.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Texas Statutes depending on if First Degree Felony or Second Degree Felony- punishment possibilities carries same as a Murder charge or a lesser: (other than Capital Murder which this case is not but added it for context) There are other offenses I just posted ones ref to this case in chief. When EA comes to trial in Dec for the other charge, jmho he will be listed as a habitual offender and have enhancements added if found guilty in that case (enhancements at link with 85 pages of the Texas Penal Code. *this was 2015 and if I understand correctly the revisions take effect Jan 1, 2017 so should be current) So JMHO without a body, this is as close to a Murder case as that the State chose to go. With body would have been Capital Murder with lesser charges. *plus the aggravated kidnapping most likely.

Sec. 20.04. AGGRAVATED KIDNAPPING.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a felony of the first degree.
(d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he voluntarily released the victim in a safe place. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second degree. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.20.htm

First Degree Felony [Tex. Penal Code §12.32] (PG 3/85 https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/cj/penalcode.pdf )
• Imprisonment in the institutional division for life, or
• Imprisonment in the institutional division for not more than 99 years or less than five years with the exception of aggravated sexual assault, which adds a 25-year minimum punishment if the victim is younger than 6, or younger than 14 and the offense contained threats of serious bodily injury or death, or use of a deadly weapon
• In addition to imprisonment, may receive a fine not to exceed
$10,000

Second Degree Felony [Tex. Penal Code §12.33]
• Imprisonment in the institutional division for not more than 20 years or less than two years
• In addition to imprisonment, may receive a fine not to exceed $10,000

CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 5. (PG 12/85 https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/cj/penalcode.pdf )
OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON
TEXAS PENAL CODE
Offenses Against the Person include Criminal Homicide, Kidnapping and Unlawful Restraint, Sexual Offenses and Assaultive Offenses.

Capital Felony [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §12.31]
If the individual is found guilty and the state seeks the death penalty:
• Imprisonment in the institutional division for life without the possibility of parole, or
• Death

If the individual is found guilty and the state does not seek the death penalty:
• Imprisonment in the institutional division for life without the possibility of parole
• However, an individual under the age of 18 at the time of the offense as well as a certified juvenile are no longer eligible for life without parole.

First Degree Felony:
*Murder (other than under immediate influence of sudden passion from an adequate cause) [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §19.02(b), (c)]
*Aggravated Kidnapping (without voluntary release of victim in a safe place) [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §20.04(a) - (c)]

Second Degree Felony (PG 13/85 https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/files/cj/penalcode.pdf )
*Murder (committed under immediate influence of sudden passion from adequate cause) [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §19.02(b), (d)]
*Manslaughter [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §19.04]
*Aggravated Kidnapping (with voluntary release of victim in a safe place) [Tex. Penal Code Ann. §20.04(d)]

 

[arkansasmimi]

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 1. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 42. JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.42.htm

Art. 42.03. PRONOUNCING SENTENCE; TIME; CREDIT FOR TIME SPENT IN JAIL BETWEEN ARREST AND SENTENCE OR PENDING APPEAL.

Sec. 1. (a) Except as provided in Article 42.14, sentence shall be pronounced in the defendant's presence.

(b) The court shall permit a victim, close relative of a deceased victim, or guardian of a victim, as defined by Article 56.01 of this code, to appear in person to present to the court and to the defendant a statement of the person's views about the offense, the defendant, and the effect of the offense on the victim. The victim, relative, or guardian may not direct questions to the defendant while making the statement. The court reporter may not transcribe the statement. The statement must be made:
(1) after punishment has been assessed and the court has determined whether or not to grant community supervision in the case;
(2) after the court has announced the terms and conditions of the sentence; and
(3) after sentence is pronounced.

Sec. 2. (a) In all criminal cases the judge of the court in which the defendant is convicted shall give the defendant credit on the defendant's sentence for the time that the defendant has spent:
(1) in jail for the case, including confinement served as described by Article 46B.009 and excluding confinement served as a condition of community supervision, from the time of his arrest and confinement until his sentence by the trial court;
(2) in a substance abuse treatment facility operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice under Section 493.009, Government Code, or another court-ordered residential program or facility as a condition of deferred adjudication community supervision granted in the case if the defendant successfully completes the treatment program at that facility; or
(3) confined in a mental health facility or residential care facility as described by Article 46B.009.

Text of subsection effective until January 01, 2017
(b) In all revocations of a suspension of the imposition of a sentence the judge shall enter the restitution or reparation due and owing on the date of the revocation.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.42.htm

Art. 56.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
(1) "Close relative of a deceased victim" means a person who was the spouse of a deceased victim at the time of the victim's death or who is a parent or adult brother, sister, or child of the deceased victim.
(2) "Guardian of a victim" means a person who is the legal guardian of the victim, whether or not the legal relationship between the guardian and victim exists because of the age of the victim or the physical or mental incompetency of the victim.
(2-a) "Sexual assault" means an offense under Section 21.02, 21.11(a)(1), 22.011, or 22.021, Penal Code.
(3) "Victim" means a person who is the victim of the offense of sexual assault, kidnapping, aggravated robbery, trafficking of persons, or injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual or who has suffered personal injury or death as a result of the criminal conduct of another. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.56.htm#56.01

 

[arkansasmimi]

Art. 42.09. COMMENCEMENT OF SENTENCE; STATUS DURING APPEAL; PEN PACKET. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.42.htm
Sec. 1. Except as provided in Sections 2 and 3, a defendant shall be delivered to a jail or to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice when his sentence is pronounced, or his sentence to death is announced, by the court. The defendant's sentence begins to run on the day it is pronounced, but with all credits, if any, allowed by Article 42.03.
Sec. 2. If a defendant appeals his conviction and is released on bail pending disposition of his appeal, when his conviction is affirmed, the clerk of the trial court, on receipt of the mandate from the appellate court, shall issue a commitment against the defendant. The officer executing the commitment shall endorse thereon the date he takes the defendant into custody and the defendant's sentence begins to run from the date endorsed on the commitment. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice shall admit the defendant named in the commitment on the basis of the commitment.
Sec. 3. If a defendant convicted of a felony is sentenced to death or to life in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice or is ineligible for release on bail pending appeal under Article 44.04(b) and gives notice of appeal, the defendant shall be transferred to the department on a commitment pending a mandate from the court of appeals or the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Sec. 4. If a defendant is convicted of a felony, is eligible for release on bail pending appeal under Article 44.04(b), and gives notice of appeal, he shall be transferred to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on a commitment pending a mandate from the Court of Appeals or the Court of Criminal Appeals upon request in open court or upon written request to the sentencing court. Upon a valid transfer to the department under this section, the defendant may not thereafter be released on bail pending his appeal.
Sec. 5. If a defendant is transferred to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice pending appeal under Section 3 or 4, his sentence shall be computed as if no appeal had been taken if the appeal is affirmed.
Sec. 6. All defendants who have been transferred to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice pending the appeal of their convictions under this article shall be under the control and authority of the department for all purposes as if no appeal were pending.
Sec. 7. If a defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice but is not transferred to the department under Section 3 or 4, the court, before the date on which it would lose jurisdiction under Section 6(a), Article 42.12, shall send to the department a document containing a statement of the date on which the defendant's sentence was pronounced and credits earned by the defendant under Article 42.03 as of the date of the statement.
Sec. 7. If a defendant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice but is not transferred to the department under Section 3 or 4, the court, before the date on which it would lose jurisdiction under Article 42A.202(a), shall send to the department a document containing a statement of the date on which the defendant's sentence was pronounced and credits earned by the defendant under Article 42.03 as of the date of the statement.
Sec. 8.

Text of subsection effective until January 01, 2017

(a) A county that transfers a defendant to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice under this article shall deliver to an officer designated by the department:
(1) a copy of the judgment entered pursuant to Article 42.01, completed on a standardized felony judgment form described by Section 4 of that article;
(2) a copy of any order revoking community supervision and imposing sentence pursuant to Section 23, Article 42.12, including:
(A) any amounts owed for restitution, fines, and court costs, completed on a standardized felony judgment form described by Section 4, Article 42.01; and
(B) a copy of the client supervision plan prepared for the defendant by the community supervision and corrections department supervising the defendant, if such a plan was prepared;
(3) a written report that states the nature and the seriousness of each offense and that states the citation to the provision or provisions of the Penal Code or other law under which the defendant was convicted;
(4) a copy of the victim impact statement, if one has been prepared in the case under Article 56.03;
(5) a statement as to whether there was a change in venue in the case and, if so, the names of the county prosecuting the offense and the county in which the case was tried;
(6) if requested, information regarding the criminal history of the defendant, including the defendant's state identification number if the number has been issued;
(7) a copy of the indictment or information for each offense;
(8) a checklist sent by the department to the county and completed by the county in a manner indicating that the documents required by this subsection and Subsection (c) accompany the defendant;
(9) if prepared, a copy of a presentence or postsentence investigation report prepared under Section 9, Article 42.12;
(10) a copy of any detainer, issued by an agency of the federal government, that is in the possession of the county and that has been placed on the defendant;
(11) if prepared, a copy of the defendant's Texas Uniform Health Status Update Form; and
(12) a written description of a hold or warrant, issued by any other jurisdiction, that the county is aware of and that has been placed on or issued for the defendant.