Judge schedules March 21 discovery hearing, orders follow-up checks in State v. R.C. Curtis

Judge Stephanie Boyd of the 187th District Court set a March 21, 9 a.m., hearing to finish discovery in State of Texas v. R.C. Curtis and said the defendant may appear by Zoom; the court said a jury trial date will be assigned at that hearing.

The hearing focused on documentary discovery the prosecution said it had produced and on additional materials defense counsel requested. Prosecutors Daryl Harris and Steve Spear announced for the State; Charles Buck appeared for the defense and the defendant, R.C. Curtis, participated by Zoom. Detective Hines testified about the documents and videos he had collected and turned over to defense counsel.

Why it matters: the materials disclosed and the outstanding checks the court ordered could affect defense strategy and trial scheduling. Defense counsel told the court he is pursuing additional out‑of‑state reports after learning that one of the case witnesses was later involved in a homicide, an issue he said may be relevant to his client’s defense.

Detective Hines said he provided an array of police reports, offense reports, witness statements, and video files tied to multiple SAPD case numbers. He told the court he had obtained and turned over an arrest report listed as SAPD 16158115 (a five‑page incident report related to the arrest of witness Antonio Jones) and the associated body‑worn camera footage. Hines said he ran evidence.com searches for the case numbers defense requested and provided the results and copies of related reports and emails.

On the question of cell‑phone evidence, defense counsel asked whether videos were found on phones obtained from Antonio Jones. Detective Hines answered, “No. There were no video obtained,” and the transcript shows no video files were extracted from Jones’s phones. Buck pressed Hines to check the property booked with Jones at the time of arrest and whether a cell phone had been processed with his property; Hines agreed to review the property room records and report back to the court.

The detective also produced internal email traffic, witness interview materials, and a set of Crime Stoppers tips. The court and parties clarified the count of Crime Stoppers pages: Hines said the record reflects 36 pages of Crime Stoppers material provided to the defense. Hines told the court he had not undertaken additional follow‑up on those tips beyond what he documented in his prosecution guide.

Defense counsel raised a separate investigatory matter on the record, saying one of the witnesses in the case later killed another witness in Indiana and that he was attempting to obtain records from that jurisdiction because “that becomes important to my defense.” The court suggested the defense may also contact the relevant prosecuting authorities out of state to request reports.

The court directed several follow‑up tasks: Detective Hines was asked to confirm what personal property was logged and put in the property room for Antonio Jones’s arrest and to run a registration check on the vehicle connected to Scottie Perez; Hines agreed. The clerk printed copies of the documents for the record and for counsel during the hearing.

Judge Boyd scheduled a follow‑up discovery hearing for March 21 at 9 a.m., at which she said the parties will finish discovery and the defendant will be assigned a jury trial date. The judge also confirmed the defendant may appear by Zoom for the March 21 proceeding.

Next steps: Detective Hines will check property‑room logs and vehicle registration records and provide any outstanding documentation to defense counsel; the parties will return March 21 to complete discovery and receive a jury trial date.