Page 45 - TPA Jourtnal September October 2023

received a blood transfusion and that the treatment testimony about his injury, a gunshot wound to the
she received “was relatively brief and thigh, was limited in scope and did not address the
nonintrusive.” It also emphasized what it perceived severity of the wound. Further, the focus of Black
to be weaknesses in Dr. Smith’s testimony, noting was on whether the injury constituted a protracted
that he “was not asked about and expressed no loss or impairment, rather than posing a substantial
opinion regarding the statutory criteria for serious risk of death. Given these distinctions, we cannot
bodily injury,” did not testify that “any of agree with the lower court’s reliance on these cases
[C]omplainant’s vital organs were hit or otherwise to support its holding.
impacted by the bullets,” and “did not indicate
what would or could have happened with Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to
[C]omplainant’s wounds had she not received the jury’s verdict, we conclude that it was sufficient
medical care.” But the fact that Melendez received to establish the element of serious bodily injury. The
prompt and effective medical treatment does not court of appeals erred by focusing on the
diminish the severity of her wounds as of the time weaknesses in the State’s case, rather than on
they were inflicted. With respect to Dr. Smith’s whether the jury could have relied on the basic
testimony, while he could have provided a more facts to draw reasonable inferences about the
detailed explanation of why he believed existence of serious bodily injury without the
Melendez’s wounds amounted to serious bodily ameliorating effects of medical treatment.
injury, this does not mean that his conclusion Considering the cumulative force of the evidence
stating that he believed this was serious bodily and allowing the drawing of reasonable inferences
injury, coupled with the basic facts of Melendez’s by the jury, the evidence was sufficient to support a
injuries, constituted an insufficient basis for the jury finding that Melendez faced a substantial risk of
to conclude that the statutory standard was met. death as a result of two gunshot wounds to the thigh
We also disagree with the court of appeals’ implicit and chest. We therefore reverse the judgment of the
suggestion that the statute requires a showing that a court of appeals and remand the case for
vital organ was struck to establish serious bodily consideration of Appellant’s remaining arguments
injury under these circumstances. While evidence raised on appeal.
showing that a vital organ was struck by a gunshot Garcia v. State, No. PD-0679-21, Tex. Crim. App.,
would likely suffice to meet the statutory standard, Jan. 11, 2023.
that is not a necessary condition for finding serious
bodily injury. Instead, the sole relevant inquiry is *************************************************
whether the injury as inflicted “creates a substantial *********************
risk of death.”
SEARCH & SEIZURE – Reasonable suspicion.
Finally, the court of appeals relied on several
decisions to support its holding, but we find those
decisions to be readily distinguishable. For
example, in Williams v. State, the complainant was Jesse Walker pled guilty to one count of being a
shot in the lower back, buttocks, and thigh. (In that felon in possession of a firearm. His plea reserved
case,) The State offered no expert testimony the right to appeal the district court’s denial of his
concerning the risk or severity of the injuries and motion to suppress. He challenges the district
the victim did not testify to the extent of his court’s determinations that a firearm and cell phone
injuries. We observed there that “[n]o testimony, discovered in his car, as well as statements he made
whatsoever, was offered to prove serious bodily to officers, were admissible. We AFFIRM.
injury.” Similarly, in Black v. State, the State did not On April 30, 2020, Officers Donovan Polk and
offer any testimony from the treating physician, nor Rolando Foster were patrolling a high-crime area in
did it offer any hospital records. The victim’s
Houston, Texas. They saw a Nissan Altima

Sept/Oct 2023 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 38