Background

• Appellant Rolle was convicted of capital murder for shooting Yvonne Sanchez during a burglary of a habitation; punishment automatic life without parole.
• Sanchez was nearly six months pregnant; the unborn child died due to extreme prematurity after delivery.
• State introduced autopsy photos of the unborn child; defense objected, arguing 403 prejudice outweighed value.
• Defense also contested the jury charge, including transferred-intent instructions and their relation to burglary as the underlying felony.
• Evidence showed a feud with Rubio; appellant admitted being present and kicking Rubio’s door, with co-defendants involved; multiple witnesses and physical evidence connected the scene.
• Court analyzed whether the autopsy photograph was improperly admitted and whether charge error required reversal; ultimately affirmed conviction and sentence.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Prible v. State, 175 S.W.3d 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (autopsy photos can be inadmissible if probative value is weak and prejudicial impact is high)
• Reese v. State, 33 S.W.3d 238 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (harmless-error framework for improperly admitted autopsy photos during guilt phase)
• Erazo v. State, 144 S.W.3d 487 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (punishment-phase photographs; cautions about emotional impact and misapplication)
• Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (charge evaluation requires examining the charge as a whole)
• Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (definition of harmful error (egregious harm) standard)
• Roberts v. State, 273 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (transferred intent framework in capital murder cases)
• Norris v. State, 902 S.W.2d 428 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (conditions for transmitting intent in capital murder analysis)
• Barrios v. State, 283 S.W.3d 348 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (procedural preservation and harm analysis standards)