He's a passenger in a car and they charge him with criminal trespass and in the in the DIMS it says that he doesn't even know the driver. In a January 2025 court case, a defendant faced criminal trespass charges for being a passenger in a stolen vehicle with no clear evidence he knew the car was stolen. According to Texas Penal Code Section 30.05, 05. Criminal trespass requires knowingly entering or remaining on property without consent, with intent or notice. The judge scrutinized the prosecution's case, noting the absence of direct evidence proving the defendant's intent or knowledge of the vehicle's status. This careful review protected the defendant from an unjust charge, highlighting the judge's commitment to fairness. Good morning, Mr. Salam. You were you were charged with criminal trespass. You were facing up to 6 months in jail and or a $2,000 fine. We are going to do probable cause. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can or will be used against you. You have the right to have an attorney appointed if you cannot afford one. Yes, judge. I'm going to go slow. Yes, judge. On January 5th, 2025, the officer became aware of a stolen vehicle via a flock alert. The flock alert was for a listed stolen blue Hyundai. The officer checked the vehicle's license plate and observed the vehicle stolen as of December 21st, 2024. The officer observed the vehicle turning northbound onto East Tech Freeway, facing the ramp heading north on East Tech Freeway, and ran the license plate, confirming the vehicle to be stolen. A traffic stop was initiated. The officer announced themselves as HPD while giving command to turn off the vehicle and place hands out of the vehicle. The defendant, the front passenger was the last to exit the vehicle and the officer in contact with the complainant and the complainant stated he did not know the defendant did not give the defendant authorization to operate the vehicle. What? So they found a stolen vehicle, your honor. And how does he know that it was stolen? And your honor, there's no need for him to know this vehicle. There's no requirement that he knows. Only that he's in the vehicle without permission from the owner. And the owner says he did not. How does he even know that the person driving stole the car? Well, he doesn't know the defendant. He doesn't know. He didn't say he know he stole it. He just didn't know him. Did not get permission. You're really You're telling me that he's in a car. He doesn't know the driver. And the complaintant just said that you're a guard. He did not know the defendant did not give off. I understand that. I get that. But so he's a passenger in the car and they charge him with criminal trespass. And in the in the dims it says that he doesn't even know the driver. So, my friend, how would he even know that the car stole? How do they know each other? How I'm just I'm I'm beside myself. I don't When when a criminal trespass requires some kind of like notice and hey man, you know, um So the charge was um the driver into the area and he was he's the passenger, right? I would assume that the driver got charged with UMV. Let me see what he got charged with. If you tell me no, I'm going to lose it. Really? Okay. But the problem is is that like how would he know that the car is stolen, right? You got to give me some something that it's a specific intent crime. You have to, you know, there's got to, in my opinion, you got to somehow know that the car is stolen. And and your honor, first, I guess to get to that, he was in a relationship with the defendant who was in the vehicle and there were signs of damage to the vehicle that the officer articulated saying that there was One moment. A scratch on the hood. That would lead a reasonable person to believe the vehicle was stolen as the steering column was broken in a manner that only a screwdriver could turn the vehicle on and the screwdriver was tagged into the evidence. So, there was damage from a screwdriver in the vehicle indicating that it was stolen and this defendant was in a relationship with the driver of the vehicle that and then furthermore, did you just tell me that they didn't know each other? No, the complainant does not know the defendant. Oh, I thought you also said that the driver and No, your honor. I may just be misunderstanding because of me, but it's the complaintist think he does not know this defendant did not give permission to the defendant to operate the vehicle. So, there was enough there that a reasonable person would believe he's in a stolen car. So, did are you the steering column? Was it was broken and the officer said that in a manner only a screwdriver could turn the vehicle on? make sure I don't know you know because when I was young and dumb and and 17 and you know my friend had a CJ7 you know you ever been in those Jeeps that are just jalapy Jeeps right they always broke down they always had a problem we always you know Jimmy rigged it as well you know in this case judge I believe there would be enough for PC because we have a vehicle with evidence of of breaking into the vehicle with that damaged steering pump. I've been in vehicles like that before. And we furthermore have a complaint saying he doesn't know the defendant in the vehicle. No different goes to the element of without for the criminal trespass. It goes to knowledge that it was I'm not I'm not sorry. I'm going to find no probable cause. Be careful. When you hang with dogs, you get fleas. I don't know what your status is in this world if you're in this country with permission. But if you go to jail and you're not in this country with permission and you spend any kind of 4 plus hours in there, immigration will put a detainer on you and you will be stuck like Chuck in there until you get shipped immigration. So live like a halo, especially if you're not well documented in this country. Go ahead, take a seat for me, sir. In the case of Miss Eldrich, the judge carefully evaluated the officer's claim of probable cause after a theft report led to the discovery of suspected Mexican Xanax in her purse. The Fourth Amendment requires that searches and seizures be supported by probable cause, particularity describing the place to be searched and the items to be seized. The judge's decision to proceed with the case was tempered by skepticism about the officer's assertion that the pills were illicit based solely on experience, highlighting a commitment to fairness. So, Miss Eldridge, we're going to do probable cause. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can or will be used against you. You have the right to have an attorney present if you cannot afford one. Warn will be at 22 minutes. Okay. On March 3rd, 20, excuse me, March 23rd, 2025 at approximately 3:05 p.m. Officers responded to a theft at Nordstrom Rack. The officers gave a description of the vehicle involved in this theft and the officer located the vehicle which was occupied by a male and female. The officer asked the defendant if she had any property inside the vehicle and the defendant stated that she had a curse. The officer asked for consent to search the purse and the defendant granted permission. The officer located a bottle of what they knew to be Mexican Xanax um which was approximately 9 g. The defendant stated that she had a prescription but was not able to produce it. Based on the circumstances and the defendant's previous drug charges, the officer believed that she did not have a prescription. Correct. Oh, I respond. You're sorry. Were they were they just shoot in the car? They were inside the vehicle that was think identified by the human as the vehicle for the theft. So the So I I guess I missed that. There was a theft. They were dispatched to Nordstrom for theft. Okay. They went to Nordstrom. They were advised that to give the vehicle that was involved in the dash. They located the vehicle. They was found at the vehicle. Your honor, if I may. If I may, your honor, say it again. Can Can I Can I say something real quick, your honor? Yeah. I mean, there's no description of the vehicle. I mean, there's not specific articulable facts here. Just any Okay. A white vehicle. We saw a white vehicle. We pulled it over. description of the people in the car. I'll have her read it for you. It was a black 2015 Hyundai passenger car bearing Texans license plate KZD 178. So, we do have a description and we have a good description of the car. Did anyone get arrested for the theft? It doesn't look like anybody was charged with that. I don't have a Okay, ma'am. I'm going to Excuse me. I'm going to find that there's sufficient probable cause to go forward with your case. I'm ordering you as a conditioner of your bond not to consume alcohol, illegal drugs, unprescribed controlled medication. I'm going to randomly test you. If I find that you're using, it's not going to go well for you. Do you understand? Um, so what should we do about Von, guys? Well, judge, um, so she tells me she does have a prescription. It's from Scott's uh, in Midtown. What I found was Scott Reed's pharmacy. There is one on Mexican. How does the cop know that? Really? He said it's Mexican sand. Okay. How does the cop know that? The cop sees a pill and goes, "Oh, this from Mexico or this is sitting in a lab." This based on previous work experience, judge, well, I mean, I go go see what you can get, I guess, right? And then All right. Well, I need to set a bond. No bond right now. So, okay. I'll do a motion inspect evidence when I have time and we'll get But but that being said, your honor, she has a uh $10,000 bond um on the felony that was set. Um and you know, there's a chance she might have a script for this. Um and she says that they actually should have records of this. What should we do about Von? I mean, I would ask for, you know, she's got a 10,000. I would see if the court would do a PR bond on this one. If there's the I mean, she has to make the felony bond and there's a chance she does have a script for this. She shouldn't even be in custody on this if that's true. So, Okay. He was in absconded status as far as the um felony is concerned. I think that she's a flight risk. Well, and may I say something on that too, your honor? Sure. On on the M. So, she she tells me she was reporting she got switched probation officers. Again, I don't know the veracity of this. I'm just I'm just relaying. And so I'm showing that the address that was last reported, this is what they're claiming um MJ as well, was San Leon, Texas. So I, you know, there I I don't know if there was a mixup in that where the probation um you know, office was. And I don't know if that may have So I'm just throwing that out there that that may have been part of it. Um what do you think for bond to oppose any PR bond? We'd ask for any amount at your discretion. Okay. So what I'll do is I I'll set bond at $1,500. Shy. Okay. Okay. I'm not going to grant you a PR bond. I think that you're a flight risk and you're on felony probation. Regardless, you've not made the $10,000 bond upstairs. If you're able to make bond, we can come back and talk. But if you do, um it's extremely important that you maintain contact with the lawyer here because if you don't, another warrant will issue here and it's just going to balloon and and just get out of control. Okay. Um it looks like you have felony court on the 9th. Yes. of next month. So, what we can do is we can set you on the 10th the following day to see what happens there. We can't set you the same day, but we'll set you for the day after and then we'll figure out how to go forward at that time. Okay. Oh, I I can get on in the morning uh Zoom, your honor on the 10th. Are you Are you sure? Yeah. Yeah, it's got it's fine. Okay, then. Okay. So, set it for the 10th and he can zoom in at that point. Okay. For this case and then So, I'll set bond to $1,500. Um Okay, ma'am. Good luck. But but yeah, she has a friend that might be making bond. She doesn't know yet. So if that if that plays out, obviously she's going to pop up here before just come back and we can talk. Okay. Thank you. She needs to sign conditions by setting a reasonable bond and allowing for further investigation into Eldrich's prescription claim. The judge protected her rights against potentially overzealous policing. The judge's refusal to grant a personal recgnizance bond, citing Eldrich's absconded status and felony probation demonstrated a balanced approach to public safety and individual rights. Under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 17.01, bail is set to ensure the defendant's appearance while considering the nature of the offense and the defendant's circumstances. By setting a $1,500 bond and scheduling a follow-up hearing, the judge provided Eldrich an opportunity to prove her prescription claim while maintaining accountability. This careful oversight curbed the risk of unjust detention, stemming from the officer's unverified assumptions about the medication's origin. These cases reveal how judges can uphold justice by challenging flawed charges and ensuring fair treatment. By dismissing baseless cases and setting strict bond conditions, the judge safeguarded defendants from systemic overreach. This commitment to fairness strengthens trust in the legal system, protecting the innocent from unjust prosecution. Like and subscribe for more police cam stories. Watch the next recommended video. Click to watch now.