Andre Demont Thompson v. State
01-14-00862-CR
| Tex. App. | Jul 31, 2015Background
- Appellant Thompson was indicted for murder in Harris County, Texas.
- Trial resulted in a jury verdict of guilty and a 30-year sentence in the Institutional Division.
- Appellant appealed; original Anders brief deemed frivolous; new counsel raised a single point of error.
- Prosecutor argued during punishment phase using animal analogies (lion, shark) to urge law enforcement, which defense objected to only generally.
- Evidence showed appellant chased and shot the 15–16-year-old complainant seven times, culminating in execution-style shots, after the victim attempted to flee.
- The court addresses preservation of objections, the propriety of the argument, and harmless error analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation of error for improper argument | Thompson | State | Waived/unpreserved |
| Prosecutor’s animal analogies were reasonable deductions from the evidence | Thompson | State | Not improper; reasonable deduction |
| Harmlessness of the improper argument | Thompson | State | Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; not reversible |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 329 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (categories of jury argument; proper scope of closing argument)
- Gonzalez v. State, 115 S.W.3d 278 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi- Edinburg 2003) (improper arguments; testing harm under Rule 44.2(b))
- Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (harmfulness of improper argument; framework for review)
- Gaddis v. State, 753 S.W.2d 396 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (willful, calculated improper argument must deny fair trial)
- Burns v. State, 556 S.W.2d 270 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) (animal reference not reversible if supported by evidence)