Page 32 - TPA Journal May June 2024
P. 32
doubt.” “It is not necessary that the evidence call as a witness Tonya Anderson, who had told
exclude every rational hypothesis of innocence Agent Allen that McMillan fired the gun in the
or be wholly inconsistent with every conclusion air twice before Appellant took possession of it.
except guilt, provided a reasonable trier of fact He suggests that the veracity of McMillan’s
could find the evidence establishes guilt beyond testimony was likely compromised by the
a reasonable doubt.” immunity McMillan was granted against a
felonin-possession gun charge, as well as by his
In making this determination, a court should intoxication at the time of the event. Further,
“accept all credibility choices that tend to Appellant argues that the district court’s finding
support the jury’s verdict,” recognizing that the at sentencing that “[i]t seems like McMillan
jury was “free to choose among all reasonable pulled the gun first” supports Appellant’s self-
constructions of the evidence.” We have defense theory. As to Caitea Anderson,
explained that the jury has the “unique role” of Appellant argues that she provided “confusing
judging the credibility of witnesses and deciding and contradictory testimony,” which contrasted
how much weight to give each witness’s with a written statement she had provided to the
testimony. “Generally speaking, ‘[w]hat a jury police previously on several issues, including
is permitted to infer from the evidence in a whether, before shooting McMillan, Appellant
particular case is governed by a rule of reason, had fired shots “into the air” (her claim in the
and juries may properly ‘use their common written statement) or “into the ground” (as she
sense’ in evaluating that evidence.’” Here, testified).
Appellant does not challenge the jury
instructions given, only whether the evidence Appellant points out other discrepancies in
supports the jury’s finding that he did not use Caitea’s statement and her testimony that he
self defense. However, as a preliminary matter, argues diminish her credibility. First, she
it is worth noting that the court properly testified that Appellant pressed the gun against
instructed the jury on self-defense, as follows: Tonya Anderson’s forehead, but she did not
[T]he use of force is justified when a person mention that in her statement. Second, she
reasonably believes that force is necessary for testified that Appellant brought beer from
the defense of oneself or another against the Tonya’s house to Shoemake’s car before the
immediate use of unlawful force; however, a shooting, but in her statement, she said he
person must use no more force than appears dropped the beer on the ground before going to
reasonably necessary under the circumstances. the car. Third, she testified that she was “in the
car” when she witnessed gunshots, but she then
Force likely to cause death or great bodily injury testified that she did not know where she was.
is justified in self-defense only if a person
reasonably believes such force is necessary to Appellant argues that Tonya Anderson’s
prevent death or great bodily harm. The statement to Agent Allen—that McMillan shot
government must prove beyond a reasonable the gun in the air twice before Appellant took
doubt that the defendant did not act in self- possession of it—“would have supported Mike’s
defense. This is the exact language that appears self-defense theory,” and suggests that this is a
in the Fifth Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions. reason why the prosecution did not call her as
Appellant argues that the prosecution did not a witness.
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did
not act in self-defense because the testimony of A review of the record and trial transcript shows
McMillan and Caitea Anderson was not that Appellant’s conviction was supported by
credible, and because the prosecution did not sufficient evidence. Appellant correctly points
28 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 Texas Police Journal
