Cantu v. State
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 2838
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Appellant charged by indictment with five counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child; only February and June 2008 counts tried.
- Victim was eight years old at time of alleged offenses; appellant lived with the child’s mother and had regular contact with the child.
- DNA on a used condom found on a dirt road connected appellant to the June 2008 incident.
- Child testified to June 6, 2008, and other occasions; SANE and advocacy center corroborated abuse testimony.
- Jury convicted on the lesser-included offense of indecency with a child for both counts; sentences run consecutively to forty years total.
- Court affirmed conviction on sufficiency of the evidence and admissibility of expert testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supports indecency with a child conviction | Cantu | Cantu contends evidence insufficient for lesser offense | Sufficient; victim testimony alone supports claim |
| Whether admission of expert testimony improper bolstering | Cantu | Admitting red-flag coaching testimony improper bolstering | No abuse of discretion; testimony permissible to discuss indicators of coaching |
Key Cases Cited
- Soto v. State, 267 S.W.3d 327 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2008) (victim testimony alone can support indecency with a child or aggravated sexual assault)
- Lancon v. State, 253 S.W.3d 699 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (jury credibility determinations are for the jury)
- Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (defining appropriate elements for lesser-included offenses)
- Barrios v. State, 283 S.W.3d 348 (Tex.Crim.App.2009) (jury may consider greater and lesser offenses in any order)
- Reynolds v. State, 227 S.W.3d 355 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2007) (expert may discuss coaching indicators without vouching for truthfulness)
- Yount v. State, 872 S.W.2d 706 (Tex.Crim.App.1993) (limits expert testimony on credibility of child complaints)
- Schutz v. State, 957 S.W.2d 52 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (expert testimony about coaching indicators admissible)
- Chavez v. State, 324 S.W.3d 785 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2010) (coaching indicators testimony admissible)