Abel Noe Dominguez v. State
355 S.W.3d 918
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Appellant Abel Noe Dominguez stabbed Alma Garcia to death while she slept with their two young children present.
- Alma previously lived with Dominguez and Blanca, who owned the house and signed a mortgage for Alma’s family.
- Dominguez moved out after an altercation, Alma changed the locks, and Dominguez was seen skulking around and entering the home via attic access.
- A ladder and attic evidence, along with a shoe print matching Dominguez’s footwear, linked him to the scene; a knife with blood was found at the murder site.
- The medical examiner testified Alma’s death was caused by two sharp-force injuries transecting major neck vessels.
- The State charged Dominguez with capital murder and proceeded to trial after waiving the death penalty; the jury found him guilty and sentenced him to life.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence supports stabbing vs cutting as the fatal method. | Dominguez contends the indictment used 'cutting' while the evidence shows 'stabbing'. | State argues stabbing wounds constitute cutting, and transections prove cutting. | Stabbing equals cutting; convictions upheld. |
| Whether Alma’s ownership/possession forecloses burglary liability. | Dominguez had no greater right to possess the house than Alma. | State asserts Alma had a greater right or possession, satisfying burglary elements. | Evidence supports Alma’s owner/possession; burglary elements satisfied; directed verdict denied. |
| Whether the requested family-code jury instructions were required. | Dominguez sought civil family-code instructions on spousal possessory rights. | Family-code provisions are inapplicable; penal code governs ownership. | Family-code instructions not applicable; denial affirmed. |
| Whether the deadly-weapon finding in the judgment was proper. | Indictment did place deadly-weapon issue before the jury; finding should have been explicit. | Polk requires express findings; here error is non-harmful in capital context with automatic life sentence. | Finding deemed non-harmful; affirmed despite lack of explicit charge; judgment affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Madden v. State, 799 S.W.2d 683 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (sufficiency standard via directed-verdict review)
- Velasquez v. State, 815 S.W.2d 842 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1991) (sufficiency of evidence standard)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1989) (sufficiency of evidence standard for conviction)
- Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Polk v. State, 693 S.W.2d 391 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (deadly-weapon finding requires explicit determination)
- Ruben v. State, 645 S.W.2d 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (prohibition on implied deadly-weapon findings)
- Mack v. State, 928 S.W.2d 219 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996) (owner status for burglary based on possession/rights)
- Little v. State, 567 S.W.2d 502 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (ownership shown by possession and control)
- Gregg v. State, 881 S.W.2d 946 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1994) (ownership and control evidence in burglary context)
- Hudson v. State, 799 S.W.2d 314 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990) (no evidence of greater right of possession)
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (harms analysis for trial errors)