Random Tuesday Morning Thoughts

Running away from a misdemeanor probation revocation warrant eventually earned her 240 days in the Wise County jail. 

  • It's Trump surrender day at the Miami federal courthouse -- which, by the way, is a very modern courthouse. He is scheduled to appear at 2:00 p.m. CST. 

    • Meanwhile:

  • The majesty of sports.

  • Seems to be a lot going on in this criminal case out of Wichita Falls. 

  • Law enforcement used to be so secretive about this:

  • Local Weather Coverage Observation: Something that I noticed on Twitter is that every single time WFAA's Pete Delkus' account fires off a tweet that mentions an alert issued by the National Weather Service, that Fox 4's Evan Andrews account will then issue the exact same warning, letter for letter. (But it always adds the "Stay tuned ..." part.)  Fox 4 has to have some type of bot doing this because Andrews' tweet is always, without fail, seconds after Delkus' tweet. Example:
    Notice no space between the zero and the p. 

  • She ain't wrong.


  • Not that I care about San Francisco business news, but I wouldn't want to be a creditor on a $558 million note where my lien is on a mall. It would like having a lien on a church that defaults -- there's just not a whole lot of buyers out there for it. 

  • Congratulations? Buddy, it would be news if an elected D.A. was left off of that list. By definition an election ensures your inclusion regardless of who you are. 

  • Texas and Stanford played for a chance to go to the World Series last night and, tied in the bottom of the ninth and with two outs, Texas outfielders lost a fly ball in the lights. Video.

    • Predictably, Texas took the loss well.

  • Funny. The stadium at Iowa State has changed up its signage to welcome the four new teams to the Big 12 this fall.  But one observer noted that the logos for Texas and OU have been placed on a riveted panel which can be easily removed after the 2023-2024 season when the schools head off to the SEC. 

  • Extremely legal nerdy stuff for criminal practitioners only: Pretend you were appointed to do an appeal on an open plea to Intoxication Manslaughter, which included a plea of true to a Deadly Weapon paragraph, and where the defendant got the maximum of 20 years. If you looked at the judgment and it did not reflect a deadly weapon finding, would you ever urge on appeal that the judgment should be reformed and the finding placed there? It happened in Dallas and yesterday the appellate court obliged. (It had to be there as a basis for the Ineffective Assistance point of error but, if that's the case, don't raise Ineffective Assistance.)  Amazingly, the State in its brief urged there not be a deadly weapon finding, but the appellate court did it anyway. This is all a head scratcher.