Carolyn Barnes v. State
03-13-00434-CR
Tex. App.Jul 13, 2016Background
- Carolyn Barnes was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for threatening and firing shots toward a 68‑year‑old U.S. Census worker; sentence: 3 years imprisonment.
- Victim Kathleen Gittel testified she was threatened at gunpoint, saw a woman point a gun at her, heard multiple shots fired as she retreated, and later identified Barnes in a photo lineup and at trial.
- Officers investigated Barnes’s residence; photographs of the interior (showing disarray) were admitted at trial.
- Barnes was evaluated for competency, initially found competent, later found incompetent and civilly committed for restoration; after renewed evaluations she was found competent and the case proceeded to trial.
- Barnes raised multiple appellate complaints (evidentiary rulings, lineup, sufficiency, speedy trial, right to hybrid representation, judge’s oath, missing suppression-hearing transcript); the court affirmed the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Barnes's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Admission of 911 recording and house photographs | 911 recording and photos were more prejudicial than probative (Rule 403) | 911 objection at trial was different (illegal police action), photos were probative to ID property and explain absence of weapon | 911 objection waived on appeal; photos admissible — no abuse of discretion |
| 2. Pretrial photo lineup suggestive | Lineup highlighted Barnes (others purportedly Hispanic), causing misidentification | Lineup not impermissibly suggestive; victim viewed photos same day and had clear memory | Lineup not impermissibly suggestive; issue overruled |
| 3. Sufficiency of evidence | Victim could not view defendant after shots fired; insufficient proof Barnes was shooter | Combined direct and circumstantial evidence, photo ID, victim’s in‑court ID support conviction | Evidence sufficient to support aggravated assault conviction |
| 4. Speedy‑trial claim | Court’s erroneous incompetency finding deprived Barnes of speedy trial | Barnes shared responsibility for delays (competency proceedings, motions, removals, counsel changes) | Issue inadequately briefed and record does not support a Barker violation |
| 5. Right to hybrid representation | Barnes contends she was denied the right to proceed partially pro se and partially with counsel | No constitutional right to hybrid representation | No such right exists; claim overruled |
| 6. Judge’s oath / missing suppression‑hearing record | Trial judge (visiting) lacked required oath; missing transcript for dec. 28 suppression hearing | Presumption of regularity; appellant must make prima facie showing of absence of oath and must object to missing reporter record / show necessity | Barnes failed to overcome presumption re: oath; waived complaint about missing record; issues overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (four‑factor speedy trial balancing test)
- McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168 (no right to hybrid representation)
- Tex. R. Evid. 403 cases: Williams v. State, 301 S.W.3d 675 (photograph admissibility principles)
- Young v. State, 283 S.W.3d 854 (trial judge discretion on photographs)
- Gamboa v. State, 296 S.W.3d 574 (review standard for lineup suggestiveness)
- Conner v. State, 67 S.W.3d 192 (two‑part test for out‑of‑court ID suggestiveness)
- Temple v. State, 390 S.W.3d 341 (circumstantial evidence treated as probative as direct evidence)
- Valle v. State, 109 S.W.3d 500 (preservation requirement for reporter’s failure to record)