Summary
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed a conviction for carrying a prohibited weapon based on possession of a machete with a 30-inch blade. The court held that the statutory term “knife” includes a machete and rejected the appellant’s remaining challenges concerning the jury charge because they were not preserved by timely written objections or requested instructions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a machete is a prohibited weapon within the meaning of Article 483 of the Texas Penal Code because it falls within the statutory term "knife."
- Whether the State had to prove that the machete was manufactured or sold for purposes of offense or defense.
- Whether Vaughn's complaints concerning the court's charge were preserved when he made only oral objections and did not timely submit written objections or requested instructions.
Holdings
- The statutory term "knife" is generic and includes a machete; therefore, carrying a machete with a blade over five and one-half inches falls within Article 483's prohibition.
- In a prosecution for possessing or carrying a knife with a blade over five and one-half inches, the State need not prove that the knife was manufactured or sold for purposes of offense or defense.
- Complaints about the court's charge and omissions were not preserved because Vaughn made no timely written objections or requested instructions; oral objections dictated into the record were insufficient.
Key quotations
“We hold that the term “knife” also includes “machete” within its meaning.” (512)
“Oral objections dictated into the record do not preserve error.” (512)
Factual background
A police officer stopped Vaughn after observing his vehicle weave across the center stripe of the roadway. When Vaughn exited the vehicle, the officer saw and seized a machete lying on the floorboard. The machete had a thirty-inch blade, three inches wide, sharpened on one edge, and Vaughn was convicted of carrying a knife with a blade longer than five and one-half inches.
Procedural history
Vaughn was convicted and fined $100 for carrying a prohibited weapon after a machete found in his vehicle was introduced into evidence. On appeal, he challenged whether a machete qualified as a prohibited knife and complained about the court's charge and omissions. The Court of Criminal Appeals overruled the weapon-classification claim, found the charge complaints unpreserved, and affirmed.