William Delacruz v. State ( 2015 )

ACCEPTED
01-14-00606-CR
FIRST COURT OF APPEALS
HOUSTON, TEXAS
1/16/2015 1:37:10 PM
CHRISTOPHER PRINE
CLERK
NO. 01-14-00606-CR
FILED IN
1st COURT OF APPEALS
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS
FOR THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF 1/16/2015
TEXAS1:37:10 PM
AT HOUSTON, TEXAS CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE
___________________________ Clerk
TRIAL COURT NO. 1370103
IN THE 179TH JUDICAL DISTRICT COURT
KRISTIN M. GUINEY, PRESIDING JUDGE
OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
___________________________
WILLIAM DELACRUZ
Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Appellee
APPELLANTS BRIEF
(a)(1) APPELLANT’S COUNSEL: PAUL DECUIR, JR.
TBN: 05712500
P.O. BOX 9687
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77213
(281) 409-9692
(713) 450-2773 FAX
E-MAIL: paul.decuir@yahoo.com
(2) APPELLEES COUNSEL: ALAN CURRY
HARRIS COUNTY ASSISTANT
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
1201 FRANKLIN, SUITE 600
HOUSTON, TX 77002
(b) Notice of Appeal filed on September 9, 2014
(c) Oral Argument is NOT Requested.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. COVER SHEET FOR APPELLANTS BRIEF------------1
2. TABLE OF CONTENTS--------------------------------------2
3. IDENTITIES OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL------------3
4. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES----------------------------------4
5. STATEMENT OF CASE---------------------------------------6
6. ISSUES PRESENTED-----------------------------------------6
7. ISSUE NUMBER ONE-----------------------------------------7
8. ISSUE NUMBER TWO----------------------------------------10
10. CONCLUSION AND PRAYER-------------------------------12
12. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE-------------------------------13
2
IDENTIES OF PARTIES AND COUNSELS
APPELLANT: WILLIAM Delacruz
HARRIS COUNTY JAIL
1200 BAKER STREET
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77702
713-252-8157
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
PAUL DECUIR, JR.
TBN: 05712500
P.O. BOX 9687
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77213
281-409-9692
713-450-2773-FAX
e-mail: paul.decuir@yahoo.com
APPELLEE: STATE OF TEXAS
APPELLEES ATTORNEY:
ALAN CURRY
ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY
1201 FRANKLIN, 6TH FLOOR
HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002
3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
CASES: PAGE
DELK V. STATE, 855 S.W. 2d 700------------------- 10
HERNANDEZ V. STATE, 351 S.W. 3d 156-----------10
RULES OF EVIDENCE
TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE--------------------------8
O. 01-14-00606-CR
4
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRS TJUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT HOUSTON, TEXAS
___________________________
TRIAL COURT NO. 1370103
IN THE 179TH JUDICAL DISTRICT COURT
KRISTIN M. GUINEY, PRESIDING JUDGE
OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
___________________________
WILLIAM DELACRUZ
Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
Appellee
APPELLANTS BRIEF
5
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant was charged with a Second Degree Felony, AGGRAVATED
ASSAULT W/ DEADLY WEAPON. Trial was had to a jury of twelve and the
Appellant was adjudged Guilty and sentenced to a term of Four (4) years in the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. No fine was
accessed. The Appellant filed a Motion for New Trial based on the Discovery of
New Evidence and the denial of the trial Court to allow the Defendant to
introduce the criminal record of the Complainant once his character had been
placed in issue before the jury. The character of the complainant had been placed
in issue by two of the prosecution’s witnesses and the jury was led to believe that
the complainant was a fine upstanding individual who would not intentionally
harm anyone.
ISSUES PRESENTED
ISSUE ONE:
When the State presents witnesses who describe the
complainant as a helpful person who would never harm
anyone, leaving the Jury with the impression that the
complainant is an upstanding member of the community,
should the Defendant be allowed to present the prior bad
6
acts of the complaintant to refute the claim of the State?
ISSUE TWO:
Does the discovery of records of the Defendants
WARRANT THE Court granting a new trial in order to
ascertain the Mental Competency of the Defendant at the
time of the offense and during the trial on the merits
ISSUE NO. ONE:
ISSUE ONE:
When the State presents witnesses who describe the
complainant as a helpful person who would never harm
anyone leaving the Jury with the impression that the
complainant is an upstanding member of the community,
should the Defendant be allowed to present the prior bad
acts of the complaintant to refute the claim of the State?
ARGUMENY AND AUTHORITIES:
When the State presents witnesses who describe the
complainant as a helpful person who would never harm anyone,
leaving the Jury with the impression that the complainant is an
7
upstanding member of the community, should the Defendant be
allowed to present the prior bad acts of the complaintant to refute the
representation of the complainant and the claim by the State that the
Complainant was a nice, helpful person who would not harm anyone
and that the shooting of the Defendant, WILLIAM DELACRUZ was
an accident. (RR,Vo. 3, pgs. 25, line 19 thru page 26 line 25; Vol. 3,
page 109 thru page 113, line 25.). These representations by the State
gave the jury the impression that ADAM ORTIZ was a helpful, kind
individual who was mentally challenged and would not shoot anyone.
According to the witnesses for the State, Adam Ortiz would not
intentionally harm anyone.
This representation by the State would lead a reasonable jury or
a jury made up of reasonable individuals to believe the Complaintant,
Adam Ortiz was a kind, helpful individual why would not
intentionally harm anyone thus causing the jury to find the Defendant
guilty, as the jury did in this case. The Defendant attempted to
introduce evidence of the prior “bad acts” of the Complainant ADAM
ORTIZ. (RR. Vol. 3 page 7, Line 17 thru page 120, line 4; Vol. 3 page
123 thru page 124, line 5; Vol. 4, page 2, line 2 thru page 6, line 12;
Vol. 4, page 76, line 16 ,thru page 79, line 22). On several occasions
8
throughout the trial on the merits, the Defense sought to introduce
the criminal contacts with the police totaling 14 arrests, investigations
and contacts with the authorities. Some of the criminal contacts were
for drug offenses, Family Violence, Criminal Trespass, etc. The record
was introduced as an attachment to the Bill of Exceptions in the
Reporters Record. (RR., Vol. 4, page 76, line 10 thru page 79, line 22
The Texas Rules of evidence, specifically, Rule 4o5 prescribes the
methods of attacking the credibility of a witness. ADAM ORTIZ, even
though he is the complaintant, is subject to the same methods as
prescribed in the Rule. Once his character is placed before the jury,
his character is subject to attack by the opposing party. Here in the
testimony provided by the States witnesses, Mr. Tollette and Mrs.
Ortiz who described Adam Ortiz AS A SLIGHTLY MENTALLY
RETARDED INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD NEVER INTENTIONALLY
HARM ANYONE, the State placed the character in issue. The Defense
should have been allowed to present evidence of ADAM ORTIZ’s
prior bad acts and prior contacts with the law. The representations of
the States witnesses describing ADAM ORTIZ could possibly, and
probably had a considerable impact on the twelve members of the
jury. The jury was left with the impression of a slightly mentally
9
retarded individual who would never harm anyone. The testimony of
Adam Ortiz mother was intended to portray Adam Ortiz as a person
who was helpful and kind. The Defense should have been allowed to
present evidence that Adam Ortiz activities over the past several years
were acts of violence, a drug possessor, and a person capable of
committing violent acts upon others. The State puts before the jury
that ADAM Ortiz was slightly mentally challenged. That same jury
was entitled to know of Adam Ortiz past history of violence and drug
use. This testimony was introduced in order to establish a false
impression in the minds of the jury that Ortiz was a law abiding
citizen. The Defendant, William Delacruz should have been allowed
to refute this impression. Hernandez v. State 351 S.W. 3d, 156; Delk
v. State, 855 S.W. 2d 700ISSUE NUMBER TWO:
ISSUE NUMBER TWO:
Does the discovery of records of the Defendants
WARRANT THE Court granting a new trial in order to
ascertain the Mental Competency of the Defendant at the
time of the offense and during the trial on the merits
10
ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES:
Prior to the trial on the merits, Defense counsel had visited with
the Defendant on many occasions. As none of these occasions play
any conduct which would have indicated that the Defendant had any
mental problems. During the trial on the merits, the Defendant
began displaying conduct which indicated that there was some defect
in his character. This became readily noticeable to the court staff as
well as the Judge and Prosecutors. His behavior got to the point that
the judge called for counsel to approach the bench and admonished
that if the Defendant continued his disruptive behavior he would be
removed from the courtroom and may be allowed to view the
proceedings via a video monitor. (RR Vol. page 21, line 7 thru page 22
line 9) The Defendant continued to display these actions throughout
trial on the merits. After the trial the Defendants parents indicated
that he was off his medication. After inquiry by Defense counsel, it
was discovered that the Defendant had been diagnosed as being
mentally deficient and prescribed medication for William Delacruz.
Prior to the trial, there was absolutely no indication that a mental
problem existed. In fact, there was an Armed Security Guard license
issued by the State of Texas. One of the requirements is that the
11
applicant be free from any mental deficiency. William Delacruz had
such license. While we find no authority which addresses the
behavioral problem as in this case, it is a compelling reason for the
Presiding Judge who witnesses such behavior to inquire as to the
mental status of the Defendant. Such activity should have caused the
Presiding Judge to halt the proceedings and to continue the trial until
after a mental examination could be conducted. A report as to the
mental status of the Defendant a year prior to the incident was
attached to the Motion for New Trial but was discounted by the
Presiding when she denied the Motion for New Trial. (Clerks
Transcript-Vol. 1, pages 267 thru page 284).
.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays
that this Honorable Court reverse the decision of the Trial Court and
case.
Respectfully submitted,
PAUL DECUIR, JR.
12
__________________________
PAUL DECUIR, JR.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
TBN: 05712500
P.O. BOX 9687
HOUSTON, TX 77213
(281) 409-9692
(713) 450-2773-fax
e-mail: paul.decuir@yahoo.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
II hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Appellants Brief has been sent to the Attorney for the State of Texas,
Harris County District Attorneys Office, Appellate Division 1201
Franklin Suite 600, Houston, TX 77002 on this 16th day of January,
2015.
PAUL DECUIR, JR.
___________________________
13