Jacqueline Rutledge Henderson v. Daniel Henderson--Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 of Parker County

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Texas » 2nd District Court of Appeals » 2010 » Jacqueline Rutledge Henderson v. Daniel Henderson--Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1 of Parker County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 02-09-00205-CV

Case Date: 12/02/2010

Plaintiff: John Eric Garcia

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Preview:i

i

i

i

i

i

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Nos. 04-07-00552-CR & 04-07-00553-CR John Eric GARCIA, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 2006-CR-2946 & 2006-CR-2947 Honorable Sid Harle, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Sitting: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 25, 2009 AFFIRMED John Eric Garcia was charged in separate indictments with the murder of Jonathan Sanchez and the aggravated assault of Gabriel Martinez. The causes were tried together to a jury, which found Garcia guilty of both offenses and assessed a life sentence on the murder charge and twenty years on the aggravated assault. Garcia appeals the murder judgment in Appeal Number 04-07-00552-CR and the aggravated assault judgment in Appeal Number 04-07-00553-CR. Garcia argues in each case

04-07-00552-CR & 04-07-00553-CR

that the indictments failed to allege venue and the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the judgment. We affirm both judgments. VENUE Garcia first argues the judgments are void because the indictments did not allege venue and therefore failed to vest the trial court with jurisdiction to hear the matters. We disagree. An indictment is required to "show that the place where the offense was committed is within the jurisdiction of the court in which the indictment is presented." TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. ANN . art. 21.02(5) (Vernon 1989). Venue is pleaded sufficiently in a murder or aggravated assault case if the indictment alleges the offense was committed in the county where the prosecution is maintained. See id. art. 13.17 (Vernon 2005); Nevarez v. State, 503 S.W.2d 767, 768-69 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). In these cases, the first paragraph of each indictment states: IN THE NAME AND BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, the Grand Jury of Bexar County, State of Texas, duly organized, empanelled and sworn as such at the March term A.D., 2006, of the 399TH Judicial District Court of said County, in said Court, at said term, do present in and to said Court that in the County and State aforesaid, and anterior to the present of this indictment, and . . . (emphasis added). Each indictment continues with allegations of the date and elements of the charged offense. The phrase "in the County and State aforesaid" unmistakably refers to Bexar County, Texas, where the grand jury was empanelled. The indictment the grand jury presented to the court therefore effectively alleged that: in Bexar County, Texas, anterior to presentment and on or about a certain date, Garcia committed all the elements of the offense. This was sufficient to allege venue. See Loshe v. State, 387 S.W.2d 389, 390 (Tex. Crim. App. 1965); Owens v. State, 162 Tex. Crim. 212, 283 S.W.2d 749, 754 (1955) (op. on reh'g).

-2-

04-07-00552-CR & 04-07-00553-CR

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE The charges against Garcia arose out of a gang-related fight that took place on January 20, 2006, on St. James Street in San Antonio. The fight left Jonathan Sanchez dead and Gabriel Martinez with a serious gunshot wound in his thigh. Garcia argues the evidence is both legally and factually insufficient to prove he shot either man. Legal Sufficiency We review the evidence for legal sufficiency by looking at all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Prible v. State, 175 S.W.3d 724, 72930 (Tex. Crim. App.), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 962 (2005). We resolve any inconsistencies in the testimony in favor of the verdict. Curry v. State, 30 S.W.3d 394, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). The State's theory was that the fight resulted from increasing tensions between Garcia and the rival gang to which Martinez and Jonathan Sanchez belonged. About two weeks before the shooting, Garcia and fellow gang member Jesse Wahl had a heated exchange with Martinez after Martinez allegedly tried to run Garcia over with a car. Both Garcia and Martinez fired shots during the confrontation and Garcia was angry about it. The afternoon of January 20th, Wahl was with his friend Rudy Sanchez, who was upset that his common-law-wife, Peggy, had moved into a house on St. James Street. Rudy suspected Martinez and Jonathan Sanchez, who were friends of the people who lived at the St. James Street house, were having sexual relations with Peggy. Rudy had called the house numerous times that day, trying to speak to his wife. Finally, Jonathan got on the phone and exchanged inflammatory words with both Rudy and Wahl. They reported the incident to Garcia.
-3-

04-07-00552-CR & 04-07-00553-CR

Garcia decided it was time to "squash a beef" and either he or an intermediary called Jonathan Sanchez to arrange a fight to settle their differences. It was agreed that Wahl and Rudy would fight Jonathan Sanchez and Martinez that night. The fight was to take place in Garcia's neighborhood and was to be with fists only. Garcia told Jonathan Sanchez to leave any guns at home. Martinez and Jonathan Sanchez decided not to venture into the rival gang's neighborhood alone and unarmed, and instead went to the house on St. James Street. When Jonathan Sanchez and Martinez failed to show up for the fight, Garcia, his cousin, Wahl, Rudy Sanchez, Lee Ray Nu

Download 21878.pdf