After his death, Appellant claimed to be Barnett’s wife so that she could receive the proceeds of his life insurance policy. When Barnett was hospitalized and did not appear to have his mental faculties, Appellant secured a power of attorney over his affairs. Appellant also cashed his social security and worker’s compensation checks, using the money for herself. She falsely represented that she needed money for several surgeries, for which Barnett paid. 2 Barnett also purchased a luxury vehicle for Appellant. Barnett purchased a home for her, where she lived with her common-law husband and her children. Appellant failed to disclose that she was already involved in a common-law marriage with Paul Hill, who was the father of her children.

They married in April of 2012, although they never lived together. They began a “romantic” relationship, and Appellant asked Barnett to marry her so she could secure health insurance to pay for her purported cancer surgeries. At the time, he was 72 years of age, and she was 32. Danny Barnett In January of 2012, Appellant met Danny Barnett. Factual Background During a five-day jury trial, punctuated by twenty-five witnesses, and thousands of pages of exhibits, the State developed the following case against Appellant as to each of the six victims alleged in the indictment: 1. Finally, count six charged Appellant with exploitation of an elderly person, Paul Wilbur, by obtaining money through deception. Counts two, three, four, and five alleged unlawful appropriation of property from four named persons: Paul Wilbur (count 2, more than $200,000) Douglas Wingo (count 3, a Silverado truck) James Olmstead (count 4, more than $200,000) and Richard Lima (count 5, more than $150,000). That count alleged the theft occurred as part of a single scheme or course of conduct between Decemand May 4, 2017. Count one of the indictment alleged unlawful appropriation of property belonging to five named victims (James Olmstead, Paul Wilbur, Danny Barnett, Richard Lima, and Lois Cardin), with an aggregate value of over $300,000. The Indictment The State indicted Appellant on five counts of theft of property and one count of exploitation of an elderly person. Finding no merit in these claims, we affirm the conviction and sentence. In this appeal, Appellant challenges (1) the sufficiency of the evidence to support her conviction, (2) whether some of the counts overlap and violate double jeopardy, (3) the failure to suppress evidence from email accounts obtained under a warrant, and (4) the legality of a subpoena for bank records. The sentences run concurrently, but each also garnered the maximum $10,000 fine.

After a jury found her guilty on a six-count indictment, she was sentenced to an 85-year, 75-year, 68-year, 20year, 15-year and 10-year term of confinement under the respective counts. In this case, the State accused Desiree Boltos, Appellant, of capitalizing on six lonely seniors and divesting them of significant sums of money. But for some, it is a time of loneliness and isolation. OPINION The “golden years” should be a time to enjoy the fruits of a lifetime’s work. 3 THE STATE OF TEXAS, § of Tarrant County, Texas § (TC# 1568696R) Appellant, Appellee. COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS DESIREE BOLTOS, § No.

Tarrant count run