Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
A jury found Michael Wayne Lowman guilty of stalking, a third-degree felony, and assessed a sentence of 54 months’ imprisonment. Because the sentence did not exceed 10 years and stalking was not then among the offenses categorically ineligible for appellate bail, Lowman was eligible to seek bail pending his direct appeal, although the trial court retained discretion to deny it.
At an appellate-bail hearing, Lowman’s counsel cited his history of appearing in court, family support, child-rearing responsibilities, and child-support obligations, and requested a further “full-blown” hearing. The trial court denied bail after recalling trial evidence of repetitive conduct and violations of a protective order and finding that Lowman was likely to commit another offense if released. Lowman appealed, arguing that the court denied him an evidentiary hearing and improperly relied on dismissed charges and its recollection of the trial.
The Court’s Holding
The Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed. Applying abuse-of-discretion review, it held that the record established that Lowman received notice and a hearing on his motion for appellate bail. His appellate counsel attended and participated but did not object or offer evidence or further argument. The court therefore concluded that Lowman’s due-process complaint was not preserved for appellate review.
To the extent Lowman sought to challenge the substantive denial of bail—including the trial court’s reliance on evidence of other alleged conduct—the appellate court declined to reach the merits because the challenge was inadequately briefed. It accordingly overruled Lowman’s issues and affirmed the trial court’s order.
Key Takeaways
- Eligibility for bail pending appeal does not create an entitlement to bail; a Texas trial court may deny it upon good cause to believe the defendant is likely to commit another offense or will not appear when the conviction becomes final.
- A defendant must timely object to alleged procedural deficiencies at an appellate-bail hearing to preserve a due-process claim.
- A merits challenge to the denial of appellate bail must be supported by specific legal authority and developed argument under the appellate briefing rules.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the importance of creating a complete record at an appellate-bail hearing. Counsel should object contemporaneously to any claimed limitation on the hearing, present available evidence, and clearly articulate the statutory and constitutional grounds for relief.
It also shows that appellate-bail eligibility merely permits the trial court to exercise discretion. A reviewing court may affirm without deciding whether the trial court’s substantive reasoning was correct when the defendant fails to preserve procedural objections or adequately brief the merits.