Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Procedure Motions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge denies motion to quash in manslaughter case; case set for trial
Summary
The court denied a defense motion to quash an indictment in the manslaughter case against Harry Francis Lowenthal after competing arguments about a fentanyl-related statute; the judge ordered the case placed on the trial docket and confirmed previously rejected plea offers remain off the table absent new evidence.
Presiding Judge denied a motion to quash the indictment in the manslaughter case against Harry Francis Lowenthal and ordered the matter moved to the trial docket.
The question before the court was whether language drawn from a fentanyl-related provision of the Texas Health and Safety Code improperly altered the mens rea required for manslaughter. Mister Reynolds, defense counsel, argued the indictment was “some sort of a hybrid” that invited the court to apply the Health and Safety Code provision in a way that lowered the state’s burden. Reynolds said the statute the state cited “only applies to a possession case” and that its language, as used in the indictment, would “lower their burden.”
Assistant District Attorney Mister Coleman responded that the indictment as drafted provided sufficient notice and that case law supports alleging acts that are “inherently reckless” without enumerating every evidentiary detail. Coleman noted the later-enacted felony provision referenced by the defense did not alter the indictment’s sufficiency for manslaughter. Mister Coleman argued the state’s indictment allowed proper preparation by the defense and cited precedent that the act itself can suffice to allege recklessness.
After hearing argument, the Presiding Judge said, “I’m going to, deny the motion to quash the indictment at this time,” and added that the court would set the case for trial. The judge also reminded the defendant that an earlier plea offer remained available only if new evidence surfaced; otherwise the court would not accept the prior plea. The court recorded that Lowenthal and defense counsel had rejected a previously offered plea and directed prosecutors and defense to prepare for trial.
Why it matters: The motion raised a legal dispute about how a statute addressing fentanyl-related deaths may interact with manslaughter allegations. The judge’s denial preserves the indictment as charged and moves the factual dispute about proof and statutory application to the trial stage.
What’s next: The case will be placed on the trial docket; counsel and the parties were instructed to exchange discovery and prepare for trial dates.
