0!si THt C&XU" Df APP Bftta __
December 29, 2014
NWCife T^MUrfVlMe feft(\£& ^received\
LAfMWi¥2920U
Nr, xTH!RDCOUrarOFAPPEALS>
\J Qd \ JEFFREY P. KYLE /
PfPtlWl Ifto- St /\fPBRL ftfLAEf
0^ foe.\JL cajoTY TifX/'b
N^
NWOSr QtikiK/uE foM&£*
S \ATe /ASvlT OT FacTs-*>*> -»---».«,„„.. I
?^^SiiOMALE\iAlofIFo^ Of The ftalO - .--._„UJ ^
Sufv-\c«u^/ Di l He jaoitfMoaT „ ^ «*<™^ &
-X , .A \ , t si \ I . *" **" * "«- «r a" «- ^ /-. ffi ° ** «*" «» &«*- Koftfe. S^\ H^ qatlTBicn^/w i960- _ U
^W life ^USw^b^^lkaw WiA7a _ ,r
•601. 'fiokof WA?|[/h Pftoa^^. \ .. /Q
1U*\Yfe to& Stllfcjfc- AA M^Kk^L C/$e_ files -tiuslfto- se_ AW.1CUT
fofueir t\)^ft>M To lite T^/V ftota OV fW^\\ftV?»OGeA*£v
M. jft sofSM^TW Af^Wcuot ftftie$ a£ niaiffiotC" lfee.of
^HATmafT of rags
Tk\^ ^ a^ *Pp£M Fi^k. a "SiW T&tAL \m herein
fA Yl^tafn;^ ~Tk_APP^llOuIT Al^ &&*£ a /%dl_
vWso\W ha kk ViejiSr fouk£. -to faL a. P^Pe/H £$£«&.
Cosct T^cb^ S^^&xeji -Bk_ AfPdtadT To Tif-K&J 7ea^
(OtALOTuk^ A^ O^ Dft. Ateol Tfe 3- Six hxr O)KrT^^0KilV\ftt\\vbA^(z*je/0f
S*A_ fAsm^_ /w~TfuM_^e>&&e£_ Wrvrf xMerRc"Tiue_ A^si34A>o_
^ki2_-nf\iAL (WDrtiis CWeoa Urn- ^W^auIl E\n&xaL-tkR 7)-v
f^W- taiva- t^aVvsweA. tor Lt^Si r 9viTLWtfrn\ic tiAnuoffTcoA C^eO AHQckA b^U* MA
^Nid ***>_ tkh^.-t-QiO. '
A T^-^CU^ tAaUT/ for PS^YchvrtTTLic fc\M//»7T^
\A
t_d\^ ,^Ck wail An uD', fou^To be_ iD^p&rretsT T}
^ACLtk. TfAiAL AH*v "Wjiksr- —nfW&h.- AA ~The_/^LDiJT,3D/«^7/
L&mi ^^eii.\K. "Trea-i »««jr ftlcdi-fc/ for A Pe&ocL
X\ \s cAear tr/ TkLl^iouL UU AA o^ ft) i^r HsjlM_ The.
l-bu&^~
-mctHmk-w AkI ~AK£ Recoil ik>t6urT52> -Ua* iA uOv Fo/^TkH-
Xk \^ 1MPv«.\\mJT>- TEfcH-SlIaA -\tov k^TfttAL At+OfUifrf Ld%-
XTa<> Yto Tte_ /Wellftrfo co^^Ak^ A^a-vWis yw^ai MtorweY
WK a\sd ±iAeSWrn^A^isAoucjL a com^u-W mh ftAis^altajIiAj
ftdbONalT AAA AOlTOfcT/
3ki y-t? ftfTTr ~l^iiH3 4l(p ^m^A (p&9 CTen at* iw Rift
\5
0\k o\ -;vm_ ftffecd ^v^Ae^. uiVcvL. 1K_ ^Q&^UT AAft.il/Vfc A-ftO^
AUlv 3^
^peco^Q foviST Cfr Error
XV wlk /Weitos Co&MVioA tot Wivb AhenJav cA"TV€_ folocL
VA^xv ^Ltfuus- INl MvOr &vre_ "3\)fU &_\£c-Hod •aeue.ai VAo<_L bj&tfshnck_
(Xt "AKq. 3ofLi f\£.TVC6e_ sTra<_k_ ui£ve_ ft_ADAl\7 ko\M4eA. iu \l.oma}
"\te_ ftfRlU^n sUiw&~Tta\ WibTfivAL CaxwJi vj^jwdWrtoLrtaiTLiOL.
EK CCGKMA fo^ fAU\ii^ AD \jD^ge_ ClTinlIv fifeTOd 0 blecHl^l To
XI \S Ife. wfeVWr* eo^ta^ ikL\^M W^_ WktfW Gj(W_
^a , 1 ^ ^vi^1Kj ^f| coATryTew,. He.
WS\e. WAW T^T^ Ato ouTHl. ^ wThe. tfk^t_
V\*-\A)^ UfltW ft^KL. &Ane_ tAck^r^ ^^^ ^A
~TMU EATTVOA 0* n^ \mTh_ ~fNL wmUiT u^ PAmoeA
W\a>iCJ& fteMteujoA. "TVe_ UrT eft fftuiKseA XIQ-Kb. uj \11o_VA/eTflerf(ire_
V\ ftyc> j Atooe_ Wqul vs Tl^_ /Olna_ OffK&K^liiWXML
AA\eAtA XUcAir^ u^WAXT&nb TNl Aff^i\AJT PfluAMeAikH cW
~VJOH_
AVAA^ ?^^ ^ ^ mm_ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
XK>^ ^ mo ^olW^ SA a^_xt^ ^ ^ x^flAiito_
****** ^Ti^_ n^v * -Affu^w LMfc_XV^ ^^-^
Xu_Jaisaa£f
-hD Vw^Ttfer Or ^ -tk, AMIClTT ^TkJfc*^ ^ K& Uto
Ato
\%
XT iS Tie. ArRil^Ts- tcriTodTia^ iktb ^k. S^i-tes /Wcavf
cW&-ik. slior Dive. jaaL' A^uA ha Tf^ Closeu^ ftmirw.
OF ftatx>Ntota_ O&ibt^fo-t lo^ad -\k_ SteuiW: Eft fictf1 N&css&ry
•to \ujl &Jfa«^ Gdvit/ tefajtOL feoua^to_&>iibV
cote imL^RikJto-\k_ MKWmft- ousd\Jj^^^ftit^^uULa_.
0? Goosel W KTA f^*-~fte_:Bw^foa«*A, W] Tv^ &(li& Tk^
bueil is- AWKAi ft\ W OU full W «5tffc- ^ f^or^ Con-
fW TWa Bl_ PKfe^Dkai_ Artt&fcM SuklIY coaL (^e_RXij^ 0ml. Tk_
Of)
IXNWfik ftfifths- Qd *&e£Y Sta^im^- OiXTkfcf A
Ife MA_ cmoACofH Of The. flfeflojn $zo ^ M^i) Afaef
UQ^ KXuL Ok} ti^_!)%?, AftV rOF lk& Q,(M4-holpN0_
X\,nL CCUBT of WPHffe fca foLi^W Al&Ul^K187((
_/V£ ix ux^ afe feoiie^L byit /wtiiaJT ik>+ du^^
X^Ak^A- k_\s AA :n^nejr ^cartel. AmtKoJTTAiL
OTTfe. ^XX X^ /Sell couTT/' /O/sw ™^
XpmIqlji
e*.\\A fe.*Cf°>
CAUSE NO. 70294; m.112/
THE STATE OF TEXAS S IN THE 27th DISTR
VS. § COURT OF
'eteefc
MARCUS BRAGGS § BELL COUNTY, TEXAS MAYO2 2013
MOTIOM gQR PSYCHIATRIC EXAMINATION ^ *s"
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES MARCUS BRAGGS, the Defendant herein, by and through
counsel, and would show unto the Court as follows:
I.
The Defendant herein does not, in the opinion of counsel,
have sufficient present ability to consult with counsel to a
reasonable degree of rational understanding, and does not have a
rational or factual understanding of the proceedings against
Defendant.
II.
The facts and circumstances of the alleged offense give rise
to the possibility that the Defendant was not competent at the
time of the alleged commission of said offense.
III.
In order to determine the present mental status of the
Defendant, a psychiatric examination is requested by Counsel for
the Defense, pursuant to Article 46.02, Section 3, Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure. In order to permit the undersigned attorney
to properly and adequately represent said Defendant, it is
necessary that the stated attorney be notified of the date, time
and place of any examination, so as to allow such attorney for SCAtf
13
PJ'IW r'\
Defendant to attend said examination, and in this regard, Counsel
for the Defendant expressly objects to any mental examination
conducted outside of the presence of Counsel for the Defense.
Further, such appointment is required to preserve Defendant's
rights under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution, Article 1, Sections 10 and 19 of the
Texas Constitution, and Articles 1.04, 1.05 and 1.051, Texas Code
of Criminal Procedure.
IV.
Defendant requests that any expert appointed to conduct the
necessary examination be directed to reduce all
medical/psychiatric findings pertaining to the Defendant's
competence to stand trial to written form, and to include within
such written report the methods, tests or procedures utilized in
the examination, any observations and/or findings, recommended
treatment, and whether or not there is a substantial probability
that the Defendant will attain competency to stand trial in the
foreseeable future.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant herein, by and
through counsel, prays that the Court order the appropriate
authorities to conduct a psychiatric examination, in the presence
of Defense counsel, to determine the competency of the Defendant
to stand trial, in conformity with the law and the relief sought
herein.
14
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
[M MAHLER
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
P.O. BOX 266
200 E. CENTRAL AVENUE
BELTON, TEXAS 76513
PHONE: 254-939-5845
FAX: 254-939-5147
STATE BAR #: 12836700
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
As Attorney of Record for Defendant, I do hereby Certify that
a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was
this date provided to the Attorney for the State.
Date: S~ "& "V 3
Attorney for Defendant
15
CAUSE NO. 70294; 71112
THE STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE 27th DISTRICT
VS. § COURT OF
MARCUS BRAGGS § BELL COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDBR FOR PSYCHIATRIC EXAMINATION
BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the *> day of JhA *i /
20JJ> came on to be heard the above and foregoing matter, wherein
Defendant, by and through counsel, seeks psychiatric examination
to determine the competency of the Defendant to stand trial.
After careful consideration, the Court is of the opinion that
such should be:
(!^fGRANTED.
( ) DENIED, to which ruling the Defendant excepts.
( ) SET FOR HEARING ON THE day of ,
20 , at o'clock .
SIGNED:
rn
o
16
e!LhiW-Q^ MH Form 2
Number 70294 and^lljT)
THE STATE OF TEXAS INTHEDIS
%
VS. COURT OlCJ^lh 5 ^
a
MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS BELL COU
ORDER APPOINTING DISINTERESTED EXPERT TO EXAMINE DEFEND
COMPETENCY UNDER ART. 46B. C.C.P.
On this day, came to beheard theMotion of Tim Mahler, attorney, for appointment of a
disinterested expert toexamine (he defendant, and after considering the Motion, the Court is of
the opinion that the Motion shouldbe granted.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDEREDTHAT DR. CHARLES PIERCE, DR. FRANK
PUGLTESE, OR OTHER QUALIFIED PERSON be appointed to examine the defendant asto his
competency to stand trial and for such expert toreport in writing tothis Court his findings and to
testify at any trial orhearing inconnection with the accusation against the defendant.
In connection with the examination, the expert is instructed as follows:
(1) A person is incompetent to stand trial if he does nothave:
(a) Sufficient present ability toconsult with his lawyer with areasonable degree of
rational understanding; or
(b) A rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him/her.
(2) The charge alleged against the defendant is attached to this Order.
(3) No statement made by thedefendant during theexamination orhearing on his
competency to stand trial may beadmitted inevidence against the defendant onthe
issue of guilt in any criminal proceeding.
(4) The appointed expert shall submit a written report tothe Court as to thecompetency
in of the defendant to stand trial,
v-i SCAN
""."" 17
V \\i\Fom/T
(5) The written report of the examination shall be submitted tothe Court within thirty
(30) days of the order of examination, and the Court shall furnish copies of the report
to the defense counsel and theprosecuting attorney. The report shall include a
description of the procedures used inthe examination, the examiner's observations
and recommendations for treatment.
(6) If the examiner concludes that thedefendant is incompetent to stand trial, the report
shall include the examiner's observations and findings about whether there is a
substantial probability that the defendant will attain the competency tostand trial in
the foreseeable future.
(7) The examiner shall also submit aseparate report setting forth his observations and
findings concerning:
(a) Whether the defendant is mentally ill and requires observation and/or treatment or
hospitalization in amental hospital for his own welfare and protection of others;
or
(b) Whether the defendant is amentally retarded person as defined in the Mentally
Retarded Persons Act (Article 5547-300 V.A.C.S.) and requires commitment to a
mental retardation facility.
(c) A mentally retarded person means aperson determined by acomprehensive
diagnosis and evaluation to be ofsubaverage general intellectual functioning with
deficits in adaptive behavior.
(8) Ifthe examiner is aphysician and concludes that the defendant is mentally ill he shall
complete and submit to the Court acertificate ofmedical examination for mental
illness which is attached to this order.
(9) If the examination is conducted by aUnit ofthe Texas Department ofMental Health
and Mental Retardation and the examiner concludes that the defendant is amentally
retarded person, the examiner shall submit to the Court an affidavit setting forth the
conclusionsreached as a result of the diagnostic examination.
(10) The appointed expert shall be paid areasonable fee for his services and he shall submit
a reasonable estimate of bis services to the Court.
Signed and entered this the 2nd day of May, 2013.
cc: Sheriffs Office -
District Attorney's Office - Leslie McWilliams
Defense Attorney - Tim Mahler
18
ti-WbiV c
ORIGINAL
NOS. 70,2<
Cm,
THE STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE 27TH DISTRICT
VS. § COURT OF
MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS § BELL COUNTY, TEXAS
AGREED ORDER OP COMMITMENT - NON - SECURE FACILITY
DEFENDANT INCOMPETENT WITH A PROBABILITY OF RECOVERY
On May 13, 2013, this matter came before the Court inconnection with the issue of the
competency of MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, Defendant, tostand trial herein.
Endings tf thf C9Mrt;
After hearing thetestimony of witnesses and considering the evidence presented, the Court
found as follows: p I I FR
MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS isnot competent tostand trial. «\U?i« nm o'clock
Finding of the Court: MAY 16 2013
The Defendant has been determined incompetent. Di8lrict ^^g™ Texas
By: Susan Montgomery. Deputy Clark
Commitment for Restoration to Competency under Chanter 46B a^ffiYYX-/
The Court further finds that MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS is a danger to others and
public safety.
The Court, therefore, MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS,Defendant, COMMITTED to and
confined to the appropriate facility designated bythe Forensic Admissions Clearing House for the
Department of State Health Services. The Court further ORDERS that Defendant beconfined at
said facility for a period not to exceed 120 days for further examination and treatment toward the
specific objective of attaining competency to stand trial.
It is further ORDERED that the Sheriff of Bell County take the person of Defendant,
MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS. and transport Defendant to said facility.
It is further ORDERED that acopy of this orderbesent tothe facility towhich thedefendant
is committed. It is further ORDERED that said facility shall be furnished copies of the following .
made available to the Court during the incompetency hearing: H .'~r
fjDp^4°.:.. SCAN
\yi^\\\^> 19
(1) reports of eachexpert;
(2) psychiatric, psychological, orsocial workreports that relate to the mental condition
of the defendant;
(3) documents provided by the attorney representing the State or the attorney
representing the Defendant that relate to the Defendant's current or past mental
condition;
(4) copies of the indictment or information and any supporting documents used to
establishprobable causein the case;
(5) the Defendant's criminal history record; and
(6) the addresses ofthe attorney representing the State and the attorney representing the
Defendant.
It is further ORDERED that thecourt reporter forthwith prepare atranscript of all medical
testimony received by the jury or Court, and that such transcript be forwarded to said facility.
Treatment Program:
It is further ORDERED thatthe facility to whichthe Defendant is committed shall:
(1) develop an individual program of treatment;
(2) assess and evaluate whetherthe Defendant will obtaincompetency in the foreseeable
future; and
(3) report to the Court and to the local mental health authority or to the local mental
retardation authority onthe Defendant's progress toward achieving competency.
It is further ORDERED that if the Defendant is committed to an impatient mental health
facility or to aresidential care facility, the facility shall report to the Court at least once during the
commitment period. Ifthe Defendant is released to atreatment program not providedbyan inpatient
mental health facility oraresidential care facility, the treatment program shall report tothe Court:
(1) not later than the 14th day after the date on which the Defendant's treatment begins;
and
(2) until the Defendant is no longer released to the treatment program, at least once
during each 30-day period following the date the aforementioned report is required.
20
PpH.m tn ^ommlttino Court:
It is further ORDERED that MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, Defendant, shall be returned
to this Court assoonas practicable after the earliest of the following dates:
(1) thedate onwhich thefacility determines that theDefendant hasattained competency;
(2) the date on which the facility determines that the Defendant will not attain
competency in the foreseeable future; or
(3) the date on which the term of commitment expires.
Notice to Co"imJft|ff)g frflllt
It is further ORDERED that the head of a facility to which MARCUS DEWAYNE
BRAGGS. Defendant, has been committed under this subchapter, notlater than the 14th day before
the date on which a commitment order is to expire, shall notify this Court that the term of the
commitment is about to expire.
The Court further finds that the head of the facility to which the Defendant has been
committed under this subchapter shall promptly notify the committing Court when the head ofthe
facility is of the opinion that:
(1) the Defendant hasattained competency to stand trial; or
(2) the Defendant willnotattain competency in the foreseeable future.
Ifthe head ofthe facility to which the Defendant has been committed notifies the Court that
the commitment order isabout toexpire, the notice may contain arequest for an extension of the
commitment order for aperiod of60 days and an explanation for the basis ofthe request.
RennrtBv Facility Head:
It is further ORDERED that when the head of a facility to which MARCUS DEWAYNE
BRAGGS, Defendant, iscommitted, discharges the Defendant and the Defendant is returned tothe
committing court, the head ofthe facility shall file afinal report with the court stating the reason for
the discharge. The Court shall furnish copies ofthe report tothe defense counsel and the prosecuting
attorney.
It is further ORDERED thatif thehead of the facility believes that the Defendant is a person
with mental illness and meets thecriteria for court-ordered inpatient mental health services under
Subtitle C, Tide 7, Health and Safety Code, the head of the facility shall submit to the court a
certificate of medical examination for mental illness. The head of the facility shall include in the
final report alist ofthe types and dosages ofmedications wityh which the defendant was treated for
mental illness while in the facility.
21
Furthermore, if thehead of the facility is of theopinion that the Defendant is a person with
mental retardation, the head of the facility shall submit to the Court an affidavit stating the
conclusions reached as a result of the examination.
Return of Deffrfttiftn' to fftyrf 1ft JfrtfrffliPE Competency:
It is furtherORDERED thaton the returnof MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, Defendant,
to the committing court, the court shall make a detennination with regard to the Defendant's
competency to stand trial. The Court may make the determination based solely onthereport filed
under Article 46B.080(b), unless any party objects inwriting or inopen court to the findings of the
report not later than the 15th day after the date onwhich the report is served onthe parties.
Subsequent Determination of Competency:
It is further ORDERED that if MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, the Defendant, is found
competent to stand trial, criminal proceedings against the Defendant may beresumed.
It is further ORDERED that if MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, the Defendant, is found
incompetent to stand trial and if all charges pending against the Defendant are not dismissed, the
Court shall proceed under Subchapter Eof Article 46B of the Texas Rules of Criminal Procedure.
It is further ORDERED that if MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS, the Defendant, is found
incompetent to stand trial and if all charges pending against the Defendant are dismissed, the Court
shall proceed under Subchapter Fof Article 46B of the Texas Rules of Criminal Procedure.
It is further ORDERED that a Defendant committed under this subchapter may not be
recommitted in connection with the same offenseunder Subchapter D of Article46B of theTexas
Rules of Criminal Procedure.
SIGNED on mfyiu. .,2013.
APPRO
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY
M*«-
22
Wtb^ CcD
NO. 70,294
THE STATE OF TEXAS § IN THE 27TH DISTR ILED
VS. COURT OF tt^1* Pm0'C,°*
MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS BELL COUNTY, TEXjSP* 26 2013
SHELIA NORMAN
DistriclCfiurt. Bell Counly. Texas
JUDGMENT RESTORING COMPETENCY *By: s^5rr^t^^
Signal
Sytfan
Do(»"> Cle"
The defendant, MARCUS DEWAYNE iBRAGGS, having been found tobe mentally
incompetent to stand trial on the 6th day ofMay, A.D. 2013; and the defendant having been
committed for treatment toMontgomery County Mental Health Treatment Facility and the head of
that facility having informed this Court on the 3rd day ofSeptember, A.D. 2013; that said
defendant is now competent to stand trial; and a copy ofthe report from the head of the facility
having been served on the District Attorney and the attorney for the defendant; and thefifteen day
period having expired with no objections tothe report having been presented, in writing orin
open court, by the DistrictAttorney orthe attorneyfor the defendant and this Court having
examined the medical report which states that the defendant has now attained competency to stand
trial and it appearing to this Court that the defendant is presently competent;
It is ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Defendant, MARCUS DEWAYNE BRAGGS,
is now competent to stand trial.
tfLp&w
JUDGE PRESIDING
i:*b*
6
c
4)
4