Page 48 - TPA Journal July August 2022

the back seat of the car on either side of Cassie as 5. Insufficient evidence that a murder was
they drove off. Frank walked into his house and committed in the course of a kidnapping.
saw Jimmy lying on the floor, gasping for breath,
and bleeding from a large hole in his face. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals did not reach the
Paramedics transported him by helicopter to a issues of Cassie’s alleged hearsay statements or the
hospital, where he was pronounced dead shortly motion for continuance. The court held that the
after arrival. Early the next morning, a fisherman evidence was legally sufficient for conviction but
found Cassie’s body in a damp, wooded area near that the trial court abused its discretion by
the San Jacinto River. She had eight or nine admitting evidence of Cassie’s murder. A majority
gunshot wounds to the head, neck, chest, back, and of the court concluded that Cassie’s murder “had
left wrist. An assistant medical examiner estimated no logical tendency to make a fact of consequence
that she had died twelve to twenty-four hours concerning her kidnapping more or less probable”
before her body was discovered, the same day as because there was insufficient evidence connecting
Jimmy’s death. Appellant to her death. The opinion of the court
found that because Cassie’s death was violent,
A grand jury indicted Appellant for capital murder reference to it caused prejudice that substantially
for shooting Jimmy while in the course of outweighed its probative value under Texas Rule
kidnapping Cassie. Appellant pleaded not guilty. of Evidence 403. Id. The court was unable to assess
Before the trial, defense counsel moved the court to the impact the evidence had on the jury and
order the State to refrain from mentioning Cassie’s concluded that such uncertainty rendered the error
death or introducing any evidence of her death. The harmful. The court determined that the error
State said it planned to use the evidence to prove impacted Appellant’s substantial rights and
the element of deadly force and the defendant’s consequently reversed the trial court’s judgment
intent to kill Jimmy. The judge denied the motion, and remanded for a new trial. Writing in dissent,
saying, “I think these are part of the operative fact Justice Christopher asserted that the majority
of the offense.” During the trial, the State presented “achieves [its] holding by not crediting the
evidence of Cassie’s death, including a photograph reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the
of the lower portion of her body lying in the brush circumstantial evidence,” contravening the abuse-
and testimony about her bullet wounds. The of-discretion standard of review. She reasoned that
defense made timely objections. The jury found evidence of Cassie’s murder was admissible under
Appellant guilty of capital murder and assessed a Texas Rule of Evidence 404(b) on several possible
sentence of life imprisonment without parole. grounds including (1) same-transaction contextual
In his appeal, Appellant cited five points of error: evidence and (2) evidence tending to prove
1. Erroneous admission of hearsay statements by elements of the charged offense (that Appellant
Cassie; restrained Cassie without her consent or prevented
2. Erroneous admission of evidence of Cassie’s her liberation by use of deadly force). On these
murder; grounds and others, Justice Christopher concluded
3. Finding that the probative value of Cassie’s that the trial court could have reasonably credited
murder was not substantially outweighed by a the evidence with a high probative value and low
danger of unfair prejudice; risk of unfair prejudice, and she found no abuse of
discretion.
4. Denial of his motion for continuance to
investigate possible exculpatory and mitigating Echoing Justice Christopher’s dissent, the State
evidence disclosed mid-trial; and petitioned this Court on three grounds: (1) the court

44 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 Texas Police Journal