Danny Richard Minor v. State
05-15-01061-CR
| Tex. App. | Feb 3, 2017Background
- Danny Richard Minor was indicted in three separate cases for continuous sexual abuse of three children (his daughter R.M., his son P.M., and R.M.’s friend R.G.).
- The State sought consolidation; Minor moved to sever. The trial court denied the motion and tried all three indictments together.
- A jury convicted Minor on each indictment and sentenced him to concurrent life terms.
- At trial the State introduced DNA evidence showing a 99.99% probability Minor fathered R.M.’s child; Minor argued this evidence prejudiced him when cases were consolidated.
- Minor appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by denying severance and admitting the DNA evidence in the consolidated trial.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding Minor failed to show unfair prejudice from joinder and that the DNA evidence was admissible under article 38.37 and survived (or was not properly challenged under) Rule 403.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused discretion by denying motion to sever consolidated sexual-assault cases | Minor: consolidation was unfairly prejudicial because DNA evidence (linking him to R.M.’s child) was "bizarre" and deprived him of a fair chance | State: evidence would have been admissible in each trial under article 38.37; no showing of unfair prejudice; Rule 403 objection insufficiently developed on appeal | Court: Denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion; Minor failed to show unfair prejudice |
| Whether DNA evidence should have been excluded (Rule 403 / propensity concerns) | Minor: DNA admission unfairly prejudicial and decisive | State: article 38.37 permits evidence of other acts for relevant purposes; probative value outweighs any unfair prejudice | Court: Article 38.37 would permit admission in each case; Minor waived rigorous Rule 403 review by lack of appellate analysis, and in any event evidence was not unfairly prejudicial enough to require exclusion |
Key Cases Cited
- Hodge v. State, 500 S.W.3d 612 (Tex. App.—Austin 2016) (discusses joinder/severance standard for sexual-offense cases involving different child victims)
- Casey v. State, 349 S.W.3d 825 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2011) (legislative history and limits on severance rights for continuous sexual abuse prosecutions)
- Salazar v. State, 127 S.W.3d 355 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004) (standard of appellate review for severance rulings)
- Bradshaw v. State, 466 S.W.3d 875 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015) (discusses Rule 403 balancing and admissibility of propensity evidence under article 38.37)