The Bexar County criminal docket on Monday included several administrative outcomes: the court ordered a judge's warrant for a defendant who failed to appear, announced a bond forfeiture for another defendant who did not answer the docket, set multiple plea-deadline and jury-trial dates, and the state announced it would not seek the death penalty in a capital-murder matter.

Early in the session the court called State v. William Clark Gordon (2025CR010472). The defendant did not answer the docket and his counsel said Gordon had loaned his car and could not appear; the judge ordered a judge’s warrant and held the client without bond pending appearance.

Later, in State v. Keith Moseley Thompson (2025CR13364), deputies reported the defendant had not been contactable and the court announced it would issue a bond forfeiture in the related causes, subject to reconsideration if the defendant appears.

The court also managed scheduling across the calendar: multiple matters were reset to plea-deadline and setting dates (examples in the record include plea deadlines and trial settings for December 11, January 5, January 8 and January 12, with jury-trial and bench-trial estimates provided by counsel). For a capital murder case (Lazarus Carrillo), the state announced it was not seeking the death penalty and counsel discussed a trial estimate of about five days.

Clerical and procedural directions included repeated instructions that defense counsel file reset forms for excused defendants, that probation and counsel coordinate discovery and that parties confer about trial dates and pretrial motions. The court used Zoom breakout rooms for side conferences and instructed staff to assist attorneys with exhibits and trial-certificate paperwork.

The session illustrates routine but consequential docket management actions — warrants, forfeitures and scheduling decisions — that shape how individual cases proceed through the county system.