Christopher Allen Phillips v. State
10-12-00164-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 19, 2015Background
- Phillips was convicted of aggravated robbery with life imprisonment as a sentence enhancement based on a prior felony.
- On direct appeal, Phillips argued the trial court erred by omitting a jury-charge instruction under Article 38.075(a) the jailhouse-witness corroboration statute.
- This Court initially held Article 38.075(a) did not apply because jailhouse witnesses lacked statements against Phillips’ interest, and we overruled related issues.
- The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, vacated our judgment, and remanded for a harm analysis under Almanza and consideration of Phillips’ other issues.
- On remand, Phillips asserted issues about (i) jailhouse-witness corroboration instruction, (ii) whether jailhouse witnesses can corroborate each other, and (iii) whether jailhouse witnesses can corroborate the accomplice.
- The court conducted an Almanza harm review and ultimately affirmed the trial court’s judgment despite some instructional-errors findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 38.075(a) instruction required | Phillips asserts trial court erred by omitting 38.075(a) instruction. | State argues no reversible error or that any error was harmless. | Error but not egregiously harmful; conviction affirmed. |
| Accomplice-witness corroboration between jailhouse witnesses | Phillips contends jailhouse witnesses cannot corroborate each other and instruction was required. | State contends no such instruction is required by statute. | Instruction required; but error ultimately found not egregiously harmful. |
| Jailhouse witnesses cannot corroborate the accomplice | Phillips argues jailhouse testimony cannot corroborate an accomplice’s testimony. | State disagrees with imposing this limitation. | No error; instruction not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ngo v. State, 175 S.W.3d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (standard for determining jury-charge error and harm)
- Herron v. State, 86 S.W.3d 621 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (egregious-harm standard for Almanza error)
- Brooks v. State, 357 S.W.3d 777 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011) (requirements for Article 38.075 error harmlessness analysis)
- Saunders v. State, 817 S.W.2d 692 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (egregious-harm standard for jury-charge omissions)
- Fields v. State, 426 S.W.2d 863 (Tex. Crim. App. 1968) (accomplice-witness corroboration principles)
- Chapman v. State, 470 S.W.2d 656 (Tex. Crim. App. 1971) (accomplice-witness corroboration rule)
- Watkins v. State, 333 S.W.3d 771 (Tex. App.—Waco 2010) (standard for corroboration under 38.075)
- Ruiz v. State, 358 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2011) (corroboration requirements under 38.14/38.075 comparison)