IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-06-00357-CR
Douglas Graham,
Appellant
v.
The State of Texas,
Appellee
From the 87th District Court
Freestone County, Texas
Trial Court No. 06-048-CR
Concurring Opinion
Graham’s sole issue challenges the trial court's denial of a mistrial on the ground that a juror also served on the grand jury that returned the indictment against him. Because Graham forfeited his right to complain about this issue, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
Prior Grand Jury Service by a Juror
Addressing the exact issue before us, the Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that a “challenge for cause is forfeited if not made. Failure to question the jurors on that subject, [whether they sat on the grand jury which returned the indictment], constitutes a forfeiture of the right to complain thereafter.” Webb v. State, 232 S.W.3d 109, 112 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). In Webb, as in this case, “neither party specifically asked the panel if they had previously served on the grand jury that indicted Appellant.” Id.
Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Graham’s motion for mistrial. Webb, 232 S.W.3d at 114. We overrule Graham’s only issue and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
TOM GRAY
Chief Justice
Concurring opinion delivered and filed February 27, 2008
Publish
mily: 'CG Times', serif">Appellants timely filed a notice of appeal. The parties initially filed an agreed motion requesting that we set aside the judgment and render judgment in Appellants’ favor in accordance with the terms of their settlement agreement.
We denied the agreed motion because it did not contain a certificate of service or a certificate of conference. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.1(a)(4), (5).
On February 23, 1999 Marlin Independent School District and Falls County filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. Rule 42 of the Texas Rules of Appellate procedure controls the disposition of this motion. The relevant portion of Rule 42 provides:
(a) The appellate court may dispose of an appeal as follows:
(2) in accordance with a motion of appellant to dismiss the appeal or affirm the appealed judgment or order; but no other party may be prevented from seeking any relief to which it would otherwise be entitled.
Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2).
Marlin Independent School District and Falls County state that the parties have settled their controversy. Neither Appellee has filed a response to the motion. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed with costs to be taxed against the appellants.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Davis,
Justice Vance, and
Justice Gray
Dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed March 24, 1999
Do not publish