[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_25":26},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_27":28,"_29":30},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[31,74,86,98],{"_32":33,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":39,"_40":41,"_42":43,"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},"mediaId",6152274,"mediaKeyId","5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b","parentId",5499129,"title","Voir Dire Begins in Aggravated Kidnapping Case; Judge Boyd Emphasizes Presumption of Innocence and Language/Religion Issues","audioSeconds",1532,"startMs",4924000,"endMs",6456000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b&start=4924&end=6456","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b/thumbnail_4924000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6152274/Texas/Voir-Dire-Begins-in-Aggravated-Kidnapping-Case-Judge-Boyd-Emphasizes-Presumption-of-Innocence-and-LanguageReligion-Issues","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6152274-f506a3fbedc80016d1f52f356fbc5562/orig.mp4?Expires=1770114248&Signature=KnQPZ9oM6UqL9yIbspBU5ds3BveqRmX4~o5H9emOcHnmuxZjBaFmLuCTlyNk7j~pSbr6O9FJfwz5Kr9j7qXDMCsBcqN-7zk-87ArzIuBFmLHUuRsgPFYXJDhBqTQTAZg5xL0rz37-LZ6FAIJGtqrCPBiATgDtoJEqbgXmO~xQPKBtSY87l63rN6splP-yiMriEknT4wzpT7hUV6kSIsX13DaqZJUyXU3gE0JDTe8tcGwAWSLCo-g4TuPvIg8LvZ5SGTYhanNZIu-ouQiykOkOH1a7NaV6JeszSAzr1UnLl6St3wiPoLjVGTF5B6BDTd2rtwAX0FzgoVDlxDdZRViYg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-29T21:41:01Z","article","Jury selection began in the 180th District Court before Judge Boyd in an aggravated‑kidnapping case. The judge and counsel covered core criminal‑law principles, contrasted burdens of proof, and probed jurors about language needs, family‑violence experiences and whether religious beliefs would prevent them from judging another person.

Judge Boyd opened the voir dire by explaining courtroom logistics and legal fundamentals, including the presumption of innocence, the right to remain silent and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge told the panel, “If you had to vote right now on whether [the defendant] is guilty or not guilty, what should your vote be? Not guilty.”

The court discussed the offense elements and punishment range — aggravated kidnapping carries 5 to 99 years or life — and noted a mitigating statutory provision that can reduce punishment to 2 to 20 years if the defendant releases the victim to a safe place. The prosecutor summarized the aggravated‑kidnapping statute and answered juror questions about intent, abducting and the meaning of “deadly weapon.”

Language and interpretation were a focus: an interpreter was on the record, multiple potential jurors indicated Spanish as their first language and one juror identified French as their first language. The court and counsel asked whether language comprehension problems would affect jurors’ ability to follow testimony; one juror said legal terminology could be difficult and the court probed clarity.

Family‑violence issues and potential biases were another central topic. The judge and prosecutor asked whether jurors or close family members had been victims of violent crimes and whether that experience would make impartial service impossible. Several panelists raised religious or moral objections to judging others; five jurors said their faith or conscience would make it difficult to sit in judgment, and the court followed up individually with those jurors.

Counsel for the defense noted his voir dire was brief because the court’s and prosecutor’s questions had already covered most concerns. During follow‑up, a number of prospective jurors described past experiences (victimization of themselves or family members) that they said might affect their ability to be fair; the attorneys and judge used those disclosures to identify potential challenges for cause or for peremptory strikes.

The court advised jurors of the two phases of a criminal trial (guilt/innocence and, if applicable, punishment) and confirmed the defendant had elected that, if found guilty, the jury would determine punishment. The judge also reviewed evidence types jurors could expect (testimony, reports, exhibits) and explained that jurors should rely only on evidence admitted at trial.

The panel was excused to the hallway to continue selection; the court scheduled follow‑up questioning and repeated that the process aims to find twelve fair and impartial jurors for a case with a broad range of potential punishment.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","TUE., JULY 29, 2025/JUDGE STEPHANIE BOYD/187TH DISTRICT COURT/AFTER DOCK & JURY","oneSentenceSummary","Judge Boyd conducted extensive jury voir dire in an aggravated‑kidnapping case, addressing presumption of innocence, burdens of proof, language access and jurors’ religious or personal objections to judging others; the court and parties questioned potential jurors about family‑violence experience and willingness to consider full punishment range.","taxTitle","Judge Stephanie Boyd 187th District, District Court Judges, Judicial, Texas","taxId",66298,"location","Texas","headline","shortSummary",{"_32":75,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":76,"_40":77,"_42":78,"_44":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6152280,"Court Grants Deferred Adjudication for Desmond Gomez, Orders TAP and Mental‑Health Evaluations",98,3440000,3538000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b&start=3440&end=3538","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b/thumbnail_3440000.jpg","/articles/6152280/Texas/Court-Grants-Deferred-Adjudication-for-Desmond-Gomez-Orders-TAP-and-MentalHealth-Evaluations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6152280-7f5b94f063394ccbd1fa721e83bdde1f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770114248&Signature=Rblri8OzDhzbS3jYcAurDMgB6Zjjykuf2B6qWN2OZZCLiDrdxRDLvlm03UlOREncp3MDaAeYrmiKfD59KEfE8NBghvcbbzR-i-urXhH92JwjhVrPug8URVpEMOFJDO-Pup88BHd5ywLAk1Tm6-scMvxErU-J9ynlaZCM3K-XjRKZh~EP17~A5ThHA608sBN10Ee-dFfg9fLRSHzWwk7ZYDe0-j6nuAQAXPWO4G3P6y6CfLoEBEIEF44MaDmNTwX5Ti7Gr92CNuQ~CBW072LyKIloAZbJyDR~aCQPgqWC1rB-E11qKLvhvSsWuqmElKGEn~2UapheldPl2SQ9Ubb79A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The 180th District Court deferred findings of guilt for Desmond Gomez after accepting no‑contest pleas across three counts and ordered a TAP evaluation and a mental‑health evaluation (MIC). The court set a follow‑up date on September 16 for evaluation results and further proceedings.

During the plea colloquy the state recommended deferred adjudication on all counts with terms to run together, restitution if any, no contact with the complaining witness, and recommended conditions including TAP evaluation, mental‑health evaluation, anger management and Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT). The judge told counsel she wanted a TAP evaluation and a mental‑health evaluation and that she did not need a presentence investigation (PSI) for sentencing in this matter: “I really don't need the PSI. I need the TAP evaluation done, and I need the MIC evaluation.”

The court accepted the defendant’s waivers, found a factual basis in the state’s exhibits, deferred a finding of guilt and placed Gomez under recommendations for community supervision. The state asked that the length of community supervision be five years for the count that required state jail range and seven years for the other counts; it also recommended 200 hours of community service and no contact with the complainant. The court directed coordination with probation for the ordered evaluations and set a September 16 return date for the results.

The judge emphasized that expedited evaluation would be preferable but court staff indicated the earliest available appointment was mid‑September. The court noted the TAP and MIC evaluations would better inform supervision and treatment needs than a PSI in this case.

The transcript shows defense and state counsel signed requisite plea paperwork, and the court deferred adjudication rather than entering a conviction, conditioning the defendant on evaluations and recommended programming.","The 180th District Court deferred a finding of guilt for Desmond Gomez and ordered TAP and mental‑health (MIC) evaluations; the court set a September status date and recommended community supervision programs including anger management and MRT.",{"_32":87,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":88,"_40":89,"_42":90,"_44":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6152286,"Defendant Elijah Rodriguez Sentenced to Eight Months in State Jail After No‑Contest Plea; Court Recommends Therapeutic Community",145,2190000,2335000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b&start=2190&end=2335","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b/thumbnail_2190000.jpg","/articles/6152286/Texas/Defendant-Elijah-Rodriguez-Sentenced-to-Eight-Months-in-State-Jail-After-NoContest-Plea-Court-Recommends-Therapeutic-Community","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6152286-9897063bbdeb1028230f19ed59a88a91/orig.mp4?Expires=1770114248&Signature=Mn5kcEUPJju0yASB2XCwor~Lo4BoehvD0-Uc1P1mQSfu14Ivr-JD3r9hGIhhuhz9HhYeDVFCXfa18TiA4RefDfqzqJVcfVGZo4~UUEdeQclvLzaVki6iQ2Ja2Gt9H4omqZjOc6TueRj~q-mvt~uxqjJqAI9qMc2kfgDaHTw5AbUeA4uY~3t3gvrvSq3ATxT7XaX~1l20DU300MT~Buy5ex0O6lJBpQgP3hM5kyEkA14Zo6bASTyKJ-OQmIRJcQjDUSfkRjtstkVI2lSrHXmh89zYg5hDQi3mmG2A~j-fJ5yjwaftvW252WCQ26epTFFMes6Rm31Po~ILAk4o2F7C7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A defendant identified in court filings as Elijah Rodriguez pleaded no contest in the 180th District Court and was sentenced to eight months in a state jail facility, with the court ordering restitution to Home Depot, credit for time served and recommending placement in a therapeutic community.

The court admonished Rodriguez on the elements and consequences of the charge — a state‑jail felony for theft under the statute for property less than $2,500 with two or more prior convictions — including a punishment range from 180 days up to two years and a fine up to $10,000. The judge said the plea bargain provided for punishment assessed at eight months in state jail: “According to the plea, punishment is to be assessed at 8 months in the state jail facility.”

The transcript records the court accepted a stipulation of testimony and police reports and found a sufficient factual basis to enter a conviction. The judge then sentenced Rodriguez under the terms of the plea agreement, ordered restitution if owed to Home Depot, imposed no‑contact with Home Depot and told the defendant the court would seek a therapeutic community placement: “I’m gonna order the therapeutic community for you. I can’t force them to place you in the therapeutic community, but they’re gonna see in the judgment that I’m requesting that for you.”

During allocution the defendant said he believed he needed rehab; the judge responded that if Rodriguez sought inpatient help after release the judge would assist with referrals. The court advised Rodriguez that because this was a felony conviction he would be barred from possessing weapons or ammunition and noted the defendant had waived certain appeal rights as part of the plea form.

Defense counsel confirmed the client had received discovery and had discussed potential defenses; the transcript shows both defense and state attorneys acknowledged the written plea and waiver forms had been reviewed and signed.

The court then accepted the plea, entered judgment and proceeded with sentencing under the negotiated agreement. The judge specified credit for any time already served and repeated the no‑contact and restitution provisions in the judgment.","In the 180th District Court, Elijah Rodriguez entered a no‑contest plea to a state‑jail‑felony theft charge and received an eight‑month state‑jail sentence, credit for time served, restitution to Home Depot if owed, and a court recommendation for placement in a therapeutic treatment program.",{"_32":99,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":100,"_40":101,"_42":102,"_44":103,"_46":104,"_48":105,"_50":106,"_52":107,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":108,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":109,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6152291,"Judge Reinstates $10,000 Bond for David Escobedo, Orders Ignition Interlock and Sobriety Conditions",43,1725000,1768000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b&start=1725&end=1768","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5499129-e8b6a1d4effab09db0997fe3f766e93b/thumbnail_1725000.jpg","/articles/6152291/Texas/Judge-Reinstates-10000-Bond-for-David-Escobedo-Orders-Ignition-Interlock-and-Sobriety-Conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6152291-1e80aeccd045e6dadb44480996d5d11e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770114248&Signature=Pv-nyyOtEdr9PW3lZOR4Gx8iG6et7-G3uTNMHIP0edOrk6FFs9GVYYyk1HdXM9B4Nb5Ndzn4VeeWe-P75Dcuop8Tw7A0cKY~QOPp2U~MSXuK3Xk6HkJ54M0xaMq67X~QoGA-WFNcYtG7Md9BqA9KGtSlob8rueXr07ysKp1DsEGYYE~zldrR5jtBKGlwXwaQNq31Kp4VavQA4gdXF63Uf53neteq6Zvq7lnNEqrGytBnJ8d8UvbNqDwapfBewsTSaGqR0nkm84GEIVC1L71S5iLOcV~FhE2wT5qknKKZAhsY7V1yHhEh6E3h5MYPlp2KEBH6zggk0Oj3HuKQjbIy4A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A judge in the 180th District Court in Bexar County set David Escobedo’s bond at $10,000 and imposed conditions intended to reduce reoffending, including an ignition interlock requirement and a sobriety condition. The court directed that Escobedo complete 30 sober meetings in 30 days and required ignition interlock on any vehicle to which he has access.

The judge said the court reviewed a filed motion to reinstate bond and would “set the bond at $10,000,” adding that “there should be ignition interlock on any vehicle the defendant has access to.” The judge also said, “There’s going to be 30 sober meetings in 30 days.”

Prosecutors told the court they believed a prior increase in bond to $20,000 had been entered by another judge, then reduced after compliance with ignition‑interlock conditions. The state said it would recommend doubling bond if a future revocation occurred but accepted the court’s decision to return bond to $10,000 for now.

Defense counsel indicated the bond company was prepared to post new paperwork to restore the prior bond amount and asked the court to set the bond at the previous level while the company filed paperwork. Court staff checked the electronic case record (Odyssey) to confirm which bond amount had been posted, and the court tasked the clerk with confirming whether Escobedo had made bond at $10,000 or $20,000.

The court’s order included behavioral conditions in addition to ignition interlock and sober meetings; counsel and the court discussed setting a plea deadline and discovery deadlines and scheduled a three‑week plea deadline for the associated matter. The transcript records the court’s explicit statement that it expected no further disruptions from the defendant as a condition of reinstating the lower bond.

The judge also explained that if a revocation event occurred the state would seek to increase bond, but at the current hearing the court reinstated the $10,000 bond and imposed the listed monitoring and program requirements.

The bond restoration and conditions were entered during arraignment/docket call proceedings and are reflected in the court’s minutes; no jury verdicts or contested evidentiary rulings were reached on the underlying charges at this hearing.

The court did not specify an exact enforcement mechanism for the sober‑meeting condition beyond making it part of the bond and pretrial requirements; defense counsel was given the opportunity to follow up on paperwork and discovery matters.

The bond and conditions remain subject to further motion practice if the parties or the bond company provide additional records or if the state moves for revocation or an increase.","The court set former bond for David Escobedo at $10,000, ordered ignition interlock on vehicles he can access and required 30 sober meetings in 30 days; the state recommended doubling bond if a revocation occurs.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Voir Dire Begins in Aggravated Kidnapping Case; Judge Boyd Emphasizes Presumption of Innocence and Language/Religion Issues

Court Grants Deferred Adjudication for Desmond Gomez, Orders TAP and Mental‑Health Evaluations

Defendant Elijah Rodriguez Sentenced to Eight Months in State Jail After No‑Contest Plea; Court Recommends Therapeutic Community

Judge Reinstates $10,000 Bond for David Escobedo, Orders Ignition Interlock and Sobriety Conditions