Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Randy Lee Allen v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 01-04-00035-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; November 17, 2004; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Randy Lee Allen pled guilty to three counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of aggravated kidnapping, resulting in a total confinement sentence of 150 years. The sentence comprised 75 years for each assault count to be served concurrently and an additional 75 years for kidnapping, to be served consecutively. Allen appealed the trial court's denial of his motions to suppress evidence, claiming he was detained without probable cause and interrogated without receiving the necessary warnings as mandated by Texas law. The background details include the abduction of a 12-year-old girl, H.M., who was taken by a man in a van, bound, and sexually assaulted before being abandoned. Police, based on descriptions from H.M. and witnesses, identified Allen and initiated his questioning. Conflicting testimonies arose regarding whether he was searched or handcuffed before being placed in a patrol car. Allen arrived at the police station around 5:30 PM and confessed after several hours of questioning, during which he also consented to a line-up and the retrieval of evidence from his home. In court, both motions to suppress the evidence were denied, with the State arguing that Allen waived any potential errors by stipulating to the evidence's admission during the trial. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision. Once a pre-trial motion to suppress is overruled, a defendant generally does not need to object again at trial to preserve the right to appeal regarding the same evidence. However, if the defendant explicitly states "no objection" to the evidence during trial, any error related to its admission is waived, negating the pre-trial ruling. This principle was upheld in Moody v. State and Dean v. State, where the Court of Criminal Appeals determined that such an assertion by the defense counsel precludes appellate review of the issue. In the current case, the appellant also stated he had "no objection" and agreed to stipulate to the evidence, leading to its admission by the trial court. Consequently, the appellate court found that the issue was not preserved for review and affirmed the trial court's judgment.