Atkinson v. State
2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 2255
| Tex. App. | 2017Background
- On Jan. 14, 2015, Calvin “Jake” Rathel appeared at a neighbor’s door bleeding and told them he had been stabbed by Alfonso Atkinson; Rathel died minutes later.
- Autopsy: cause of death was a stab wound to the stomach; multiple stab wounds of differing direction/depth and defensive injuries on hands/arms.
- Forensic and scene evidence: blood trail from Atkinson’s property toward where Rathel died; blood matching Rathel’s DNA on a camouflage jacket found at Atkinson’s home; a large hunting-style knife was recovered in Atkinson’s front yard.
- Atkinson gave multiple inconsistent statements to police, initially denied involvement, later admitted stabbing Rathel but claimed he “poked” him in self‑defense after Rathel allegedly threatened him with a .22 rifle; he also gave conflicting explanations for bloodstains and for inhalant use.
- Jury convicted Atkinson of the lesser‑included offense of manslaughter and sentenced him to 20 years’ confinement. The court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove the culpable mental state of recklessness for manslaughter | State: circumstantial and direct evidence (dying declaration, admissions, multiple stab wounds, defensive wounds, blood evidence, inconsistent statements, weapons and conduct) support that Atkinson consciously disregarded a substantial risk of death (or acted with a higher culpable state) | Atkinson: evidence insufficient to show recklessness; argued self‑defense and disputed the State’s narrative and forensic inferences | Court: Affirmed — viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational juror could find recklessness beyond a reasonable doubt; proof of intent/knowledge also satisfies recklessness |
Key Cases Cited
- Winfrey v. State, 393 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standard for legal sufficiency review)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (circumstantial evidence can establish guilt)
- Guevara v. State, 152 S.W.3d 45 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (culpable mental state may be inferred from acts, words, conduct)
- Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (extent/nature of wounds can inform mental state)
- Wasylina v. State, 275 S.W.3d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (proof of a higher culpable state establishes a lower one)
- Soliz v. State, 432 S.W.3d 895 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (one’s acts are reliable circumstantial evidence of intent)
- Lugo v. State, 667 S.W.2d 144 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (jury may conclude manslaughter when defendant claims lack of intent)
- Curtis v. State, 573 S.W.2d 219 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (proof of greater offense constitutes proof of lesser culpability)