Christopher Davila v. State

Citation: Not availableDocket: 04-19-00276-CR

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; September 11, 2019; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Christopher Davila faces four indictments: injury to a child causing serious bodily injury or death, concealment of a corpse, possession of a firearm by a felon, and possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (between one and four grams). This is an accelerated appeal from the trial court's denial of Davila's applications for writs of habeas corpus, which sought a reduction in bond for all charges. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's orders.

The background reveals that in January 2019, Davila reported his car stolen with his girlfriend's eight-month-old son, K.J.D., inside. He was arrested for endangering a child and released on a $30,000 bond. Subsequent police surveillance indicated that Davila was involved in narcotics trafficking, leading to his arrest for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance and possession of a firearm by a felon. During interrogation, Davila confessed to burying K.J.D. after the child died from a fall, which the medical examiner later classified as a homicide.

The trial court set Davila's bond at $500,000 for the child injury charge and $250,000 for each of the other charges. After a hearing on his applications for bond reduction, the trial court denied them. In his appeal, Davila contended that the trial court erred in its decision. The appellate court reviewed the bail determination for abuse of discretion, noting that a trial court may err if it acts arbitrarily without reference to guiding principles. It emphasized that bond amounts should ensure compliance, avoid oppression, and consider the nature and circumstances of the offenses.

Bail considerations include the defendant's ability to pay, victim and community safety, potential sentence, aggravating factors, community ties, prior criminal history, and compliance with bond conditions. Davila bears the burden to prove his bail is excessive. At the hearing, his girlfriend Jasmine testified about their relationship, her pregnancy with Davila's child, and her children removed by Child Protective Services. Although they cannot afford the bond, Jasmine acknowledged Davila's gang affiliation and prior criminal history, including multiple arrests and convictions. Despite her belief in his court appearance, she was unaware of the extent of his criminal record. The trial court admitted evidence of Davila's gang membership and prior offenses, including violent crimes. Although Davila has family ties and financial hardship, the nature of the offenses he faces, particularly a charge of causing serious bodily injury to a child, which could lead to a lengthy prison sentence, necessitates a higher bail to ensure his appearance at trial. The circumstances of the case indicate a strong incentive for Davila not to appear, given the severity of the charges and the potential penalties involved.

Additional charges against Davila expose him to significant penalties due to repeat offender enhancements. Specifically, altering or concealing a corpse and possession of a firearm by a felon are both second-degree felonies, each carrying a sentence of 2 to 20 years and a fine up to $10,000. Possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance (more than one gram but less than four grams) is a first-degree felony, punishable by life imprisonment or 5 to 99 years, with the same fine limit. The severity of these potential sentences contributes to the determination that Davila's bail is not excessive, as he may have an incentive to evade trial.

Davila's extensive criminal history, including gang affiliation, prior assault convictions, and a pattern of committing offenses while on bond, further supports concerns about community safety and flight risk. Despite testimony from Jasmine expressing faith in Davila's reform, her lack of awareness regarding his full criminal background undermines this assurance. Thus, the trial court reasonably assessed that Davila posed a flight risk due to his history of failing to appear for court.

Overall, the trial court had sufficient grounds to maintain the bail amounts based on the nature of the offenses, potential sentences, Davila's criminal history, community safety concerns, and lack of reliable assurances of his appearance. Therefore, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Davila's applications for writs of habeas corpus, leading to the affirmation of the trial court's judgment.