Albert Torres Nieves v. State
01-14-00294-CR
| Tex. App. | May 29, 2015Background
- Appellant Albert Nieves charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child; Jane, four years old, testified about repeated sexual acts by Nieves at Nieves’ home; offense occurred while Jane stayed overnight with Nieves’ family; DNA on Jane’s underwear linked to Nieves but with a second male profile; trial court sentenced Nieves to ten years’ imprisonment; defense challenged DNA handling and hearsay; State appealed after conviction under First District of Texas, Houston.
- DNA evidence showed a mixture with Nieves as a major contributor and a second unknown male; expert could not exclude Nieves but emphasized absence of certainty and possible incidental contact.
- Trial strategy included defense counsel cross-examining DNA expert and presenting alternative explanations for DNA results; Jane’s testimony and DNA evidence together supported the conviction.
- Lincon Guerra’s testimony about what Jane told Noemi regarding abuse was admitted over hearsay objections but was argued to be non-content-based hearsay; evidence viewed in light of all testimony corroborated by mother Noemi.
- Appellate issue: whether the DNA evidence, hearsay and sufficiency of evidence support the conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance regarding DNA evidence | Nieves (State) | Nieves’ trial counsel was deficient in handling DNA evidence | No reversible error; strategy and record support effectiveness |
| Admission of Lincon Guerra’s hearsay testimony | State | Hearsay objection should have excluded the testimony | Harmless error; testimony did not substantially affect verdict |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for aggravated sexual assault of a child | State | Evidence insufficient without DNA or eyewitness | Evidence sufficient; victim’s testimony alone supports conviction, corroborated by DNA |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard of review for legal sufficiency beyond reasonable doubt)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Geesa v. State, 820 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (circumstantial evidence admissible and weight to jury)
- Temple v. State, 390 S.W.3d 341 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standard for reviewing credibility and weight of testimony)
- Johnson v. State, 419 S.W.3d 665 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2013) (appellate review and sufficiency principles)