Christopher Brian Roberts v. State
03-14-00637-CR
Tex. App.Sep 9, 2015Background
- Defendant Christopher Brian Roberts was convicted by a jury of murder for the 2012 strangulation death of Kirstin Anderson and sentenced to 50 years' imprisonment; he appealed.
- Facts: police found Anderson dead Nov. 15, 2012; autopsy concluded death by strangulation and estimated death at least 12 hours earlier.
- Roberts gave multiple recorded interviews with Detective White: early interviews minimized involvement or described brief restraint/sexual choking; a later interview contained inculpatory statements admitting he slapped and “killed her” and describing loss of control.
- Trial issues on appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred by refusing a manslaughter lesser-included instruction; (2) admission of Detective White’s opinion that Roberts committed murder; (3) sufficiency of the evidence of mens rea; (4) alleged improper prosecutor closing arguments.
- At charge conference defense relied on earlier interviews (history of fighting; five‑second sexual choking) to request manslaughter instruction; trial court declined and later the jury convicted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Roberts) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether manslaughter was a proper lesser-included instruction | Trial court abused discretion by denying manslaughter instruction because evidence (prior restraint, sexual choking) could support recklessness | Manslaughter is a lesser-included offense but the record lacked evidence that defendant was guilty only of manslaughter or that manslaughter was a rational alternative; appellant’s cited statements referred to extraneous incidents or denied unconsciousness | Trial court did not abuse discretion; instruction not warranted because second prong (evidence supporting only lesser offense / rational alternative) failed |
| 2. Admissibility of Detective White’s opinion that defendant committed murder | Detective White improperly opined defendant acted intentionally/knowingly without personal knowledge; testimony should have been excluded | Objection at trial was untimely and procedural grounds differ from appellate claim; error not preserved | Claim not preserved for review (untimely/nonconforming objection); point overruled |
| 3. Legal sufficiency of mens rea for murder | Without White’s opinion, State failed to prove intentional or knowing conduct beyond reasonable doubt | Even viewing all evidence favorably to verdict, jurors could infer intent/knowledge from defendant’s inculpatory admissions, physical evidence (neck fractures, petechiae), medical testimony about continuing pressure after unconsciousness, and defendant’s familiarity with strangulation | Evidence legally sufficient to support murder conviction |
| 4. Prosecutor’s closing argument improprieties | Prosecutor injected facts/speculation and appealed to jurors’ personal experience (nurses, voir dire anecdotes), warranting reversal | Many arguments were reasonable deductions from evidence; objections were not consistently pressed to obtain rulings so most complaints are unpreserved; where sustained, cure (instruction to disregard) occurred; any error was harmless given admissions and physical evidence | No reversible error; point overruled (largely unpreserved and, if reached, harmless or within permissible argument) |
Key Cases Cited
- Cavazos v. State, 382 S.W.3d 377 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (two‑part test for lesser‑included offense and evidence requirement)
- Goad v. State, 354 S.W.3d 443 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (discussion of second‑prong analysis and concurring view on standard of review)
- Skinner v. State, 956 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (lesser‑included instruction requires evidence directly germane to lesser offense)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (legal‑sufficiency standard: review evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Threadgill v. State, 146 S.W.3d 654 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (trial court’s refusal to give lesser instruction reviewed for abuse of discretion in context)