© 2025 88.9 KETR
Public Radio for Northeast Texas
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations
88.9 KETR celebrates 50 years on the air April 7th. Support local journalism, public media, and the free press with your contribution during this pledge drive!

Texas DWI suspect won't have to say where he got the booze before crash, justices rule

Shutterstock
/
Shutterstock

An accused drunk driver in Austin doesn’t have to reveal which bars he visited the night of a crash that hospitalized two brothers because he’s protected by the Fifth Amendment, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday.

All but one of the high court’s justices wrote in an opinion that Taylor Brock Peters has the right not to divulge the names and locations of the two bars he went to on May 19, 2021, before he allegedly rear ended Constantino Palma Jr. and his younger brother — a minor, according to court documents — on the northbound frontage road of Interstate 35 and Stassney Lane.

Peters didn’t have to share the information because it could potentially help prosecutors figure out what and how much Peters drank, whether he drove between bars and other potentially self-incriminating information, the justices ruled.

“And there is nothing imaginary about Peters’ fears that his compelled responses might be used against him in a criminal case,” the opinion reads. “The State of Texas is prosecuting him on the very same facts that underlie this civil case.”

Peters is accused of hitting the brothers from behind at a red light, shoving the tailgate from their Toyota 4 Runner through the cargo department and into the car's backseat. The brothers were hospitalized with multiple fractures, internal injuries and a brain hemorrhage.

Peters was also hospitalized. On his hospital bed, he told Austin police he had three beers and was “buzzed,” but he couldn't recall the names of the two bars was coming from the night of the crash, according to court documents. His blood alcohol content was well over the legal limit, and Peters was charged with two counts of intoxication assault with a motor vehicle, the suit says.

The Palmas sued Peters a few months later over their injuries. They wanted to know which bars he visited in order to also sue those establishments under the state’s dram shop law. It allows alcohol sellers to face suit for negligently providing an intoxicated customer alcohol when it results in harm.

Peters pleaded the Fifth in written testimony and didn’t share which bars he’d visited. The Palmas asked the trial court to compel Peters to answer, saying he had waived his Fifth Amendment right by telling officers he visited the bars in the first place.

When the trial and lower appeals courts sided with the family, Peters asked the Texas Supreme Court to issue an order that would protect him from having to share the bar names as part of the civil proceedings, which the high court granted.

Peters’ appellate attorneys declined to comment. His trial attorney did not respond to a request for comment left with his office. Peters’ criminal defense attorney did not respond to a request for comment.

Jason Feltoon, the Palmas’ attorney, said he didn’t see how revealing the names of the bars would hurt Peters’ defense in his criminal case. Rather, it would be a way for Peters to show remorse for the victims, he said.

Any money awarded to the brothers in a dram shop lawsuit would help treat their injuries— including permanent cognitive injuries for one brother and primarily orthopedic injuries for the other, Feltoon said.

“I think it’s a dangerous application of the Fifth Amendment,” Feltoon said. “I think it turns the Fifth Amendment essentially into a blank check just to keep your mouth shut about whatever matter you deem fit.”

Feltoon added he expects his clients will learn the names of the bars once Peters’ criminal proceedings are over.

The Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association and the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association filed briefs in support of protecting Peters’ constitutional right against self-incrimination because the case could directly affect their clients as across the state.

While the Palmas' inability to sue the bars over the crash is a "regrettable collateral consequence" of this ruling, criminal defense attorney and former TCDLA president Grant Scheiner said the constitutional rights of the accused are paramount.

“It's going to create — at a minimum — an inconvenience for civil litigants," Scheiner said, "But it will still protect the rights of the accused, which, in the United States justice system, is the top of the pyramid."

Got a tip? Email Toluwani Osibamowo at tosibamowo@kera.org. You can follow Toluwani on X @tosibamowo.

KERA News is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, consider making a tax-deductible gift today. Thank you.

Copyright 2024 KERA

Toluwani Osibamowo