State v. Stephen Mercantel

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-16-00820-CR
The State of Texas, Appellant
v.
Stephen Mercantel, Appellee
FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 7 OF TRAVIS COUNTY
NO. C-1-CR-16-202586, HONORABLE ELISABETH ASHLEA EARLE, JUDGE PRESIDING
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Stephen Mercantel was charged by information and complaint with driving while
intoxicated. See Tex. Penal Code § 49.04. In a pre-trial hearing, Mercantel moved to have the
underlying Intoxilyzer breath test results suppressed on the basis that the test was involuntary due
to coercion by the arresting officer. The trial court granted the motion and suppressed the breath test
results. In its appeal, the State has filed a motion to abate the appeal and remand the cause to the
trial court so that it can make findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that “upon the request of the losing
party on a motion to suppress evidence, the trial court shall state its essential findings,” which the
court defined as “findings of fact and conclusions of law adequate to provide an appellate court with
a basis upon which to review the trial court’s application of the law to the facts.” State v. Cullen,
195 S.W.3d 696, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). The findings must be “adequate and complete, covering
every potentially dispositive issue that might reasonably be said to have arisen in the course of the
suppression proceedings,” State v. Elias, 339 S.W.3d 667, 676 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011), including
“explicit credibility determination[s]” regarding the witnesses who testified at the suppression
hearing, State v. Mendoza, 365 S.W.3d 666, 673 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). Findings of fact and
conclusions of law “ensure that reviewing courts need not presume, assume, or guess at what
historical facts a trial judge actually found when making a ruling in a motion to suppress hearing.”
Mendoza, 365 S.W.3d at 671. Moreover, “Rule 44.4 authorizes the court of appeals to remand the
case to the trial court so that the court of appeals is not forced to infer facts from an unexplained
ruling.” Cullen, 195 S.W.3d at 698 (citing Tex. R. App. P. 44.4).
Accordingly, we grant the State’s motion, abate the appeal, and remand the cause to
the trial court so that it may make findings of fact and conclusions of law pertaining to its granting
of Mercantel’s motion to suppress. A supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings of fact
and conclusions of law shall be filed with this Court no later than February 3, 2017. This appeal will
be reinstated once the supplemental clerk’s record is filed.
It is ordered January 4, 2017.
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Goodwin
Abated and Remanded
Filed: January 4, 2017
Do Not Publish
2