Shearer v. State
| Decision Date | 23 August 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 09-83-191,09-83-191 |
| Citation | 690 S.W.2d 2 |
| Parties | Charles Brady SHEARER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. CR. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
By indictment the Appellant was charged with intentionally and knowingly causing bodily injury to Herbert Linn Meyers by biting Meyers on the arm. In the same indictment the Appellant was charged with intentionally and knowingly causing bodily injury to Gerald Pedigo by hitting Pedigo with his hand. The trial was on the alleged assault against Meyers, the jury finding Appellant guilty. The trial court assessed punishment at 30 days in the county jail.
Sometime during the afternoon of February 18, 1983, the Appellant's wife drove to Linn Meyers' Exxon Service Station at the corner of Interstate 10 and Lucas in Beaumont to purchase fuel. Apparently she requested that leaded gasoline be pumped into the tank of her automobile which was certified for unleaded fuel only. An attendant at the station refused her request. She then proceeded home and reported this refusal to Appellant, a Beaumont police officer.
At about 8:00 o'clock P.M. or 8:30 P.M. the Appellant went to the Exxon station and engaged in a conversation with the attendant, Gerald Pedigo, and the station owner, Linn Meyers. The evidence is conflicting from this point onward. A heated argument took place which resulted in the confrontation and altercation that resulted in the charges against the Appellant. The Appellant testified that he went to the station as a customer and not in his capacity as a police officer for the City of Beaumont. At some point during the lively and heated discussion, he did identify himself as a police officer by exhibiting a small badge. The Appellant was not wearing his correct, usual police officer's uniform. Appellant used the station's telephone to call the police dispatcher for a unit to be sent to the scene.
Frankly, the testimony and evidence of the Appellant on the one hand and Pedigo and Meyers on the other are highly contradictory and conflicting. Although the preliminary facts are much in dispute, some type of altercation or wrestling match took place. The disturbance involving Linn Meyers took place on his own property. At about the time the first phone call was made to the police station by the Appellant, he conceded that no law had been violated by Meyers except allegedly for failure of Meyers to identify himself. Meyers testified that he had identified himself and even had delivered to Appellant his business card. In the Statement of Facts we find (questions by Mrs. Vivian Bradford and answers by Charles Brady Shearer):
Later, in the Statement of Facts, we find (questions by Mrs. Vivian Bradford and answers by Charles Brady Shearer):
....
....
The Appellant argues that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Defenses and special evidentiary charges
...and the officer did not reasonably believe the said arrest was lawful. It is a jury question when raised by evidence. Shearer v. State , 690 S.W.2d 2 (Tex. 3-23 Defenses and Special Evidentiary Charges §3:480 App.- Beaumont 1984, pet. ref’d). Where the evidence is in dispute as to the facts......
-
Table of cases
...Shannon v. State 28 S.W. 687 (Tex. Crim. App. 1894) 3:2010 Shaw v. State 243 S.W.3d 647 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) 1:285 Shearer v. State 690 S.W.2d 2 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 1984, no pet.) 3:450, 6:210 Shears v. State 895 S.W.2d 456 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1995, no pet.) 12:10, 12:40 Sherbert v. State 53......
-
Offenses against person
...unlawful and the officer did not reasonably believe the said arrest was lawful. It was a jury question when raised in Shearer v. State , 690 S.W.2d 2 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1984, pet. ref’d). If the legality of a warrantless arrest is disputed, defendant is entitled to a jury charge on unlawful......