Does anyone have caselaw on this issue. We are starting to get these Motions to Quash, based on lack of representation in the misdemeanor court. Of course, the complained of conviction is always from another county. Usually, the further away the better.

I will be interested to see the replies on this thread as I have just receieved one of these motions as well. Actually, we havnt even indicted the case yet. I received a motion requesting the court to preclude me from indicting the defendant using that prior as an enhancement. After he gets indicted I expect the motion to quash to follow.

A case to start with: Disheroon v. S., 687 sw2d 332 (CCA 85) and an more recent unpublished case: Lockett v. S., No. 01-03-00851-CR, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 8782 (1st COA Feb 9, 05)(not designataed for publication)

Thanks, John. Appreciate the response and I am glad I don't have Jeromie's problem.

A motion to quash is the wrong vehicle. Nothing wrong with the notice contained in the charging instrument. Really, it is a disguised motion seeking to declare the evidence insufficient before the trial even begins. Educate your judge that he shouldn't even hear the motion.

Defendant has to file a writ in a separate case and litigate the constitutionality of the conviction. Don't let defendant shift burden to state or allow defendant to litigate the issue in the wrong forum.

For a related thread that discusses this issue of a pretrial hearing on sufficiency of evidence, see this link.

I wholeheartedly agree with JB. See, e.g., Moreno v. S., 721 sw2d 295, 300 (CCA 86).

By the way, judges don't get to tell you what cases you can or cannot present to a grand jury.

I am planning on presented a trial brief to the court stating that this is the wrong venue for what defense counsel is trying to do. We have been through this before with a different attorney. This will be before a different judge.

Some courts have conducted retrospective indigency hearings when this issue is properly raised. Sifford v. State, 511 S.W.2d 526. But, there will usually have been a waiver of counsel.