Douglas Lee McGowan v. State
375 S.W.3d 585
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- McGowan was convicted in Fort Bend County of stalking, a third-degree felony.
- The indictment alleged conduct from August 1, 2009 to August 17, 2009, directed at a former co-worker and her family.
- McGowan pleaded not guilty to the stalking charge.
- Evidence showed years of unwanted contact (calls, emails, letters, blogs) and fear by the complainant and her family.
- In August 2009, McGowan traveled to Texas, appeared in the complainant’s family neighborhood, and was escorted away by police after being warned to stay away.
- McGowan challenged both the sufficiency of the evidence and the trial court’s denial of a limiting instruction for extraneous-offense evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for stalking | McGowan argues the state failed to show a scheme or conduct placed fear | State contends evidence from 2005–2009 shows a course of conduct placing fear | Evidence sufficient to prove stalking beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Limiting instruction for extraneous-offense evidence | McGowan sought a limiting instruction restricting extraneous acts to specific purposes | State argued no limiting instruction was required since extraneous acts were admissible as relevant to fear | Trial court properly denied the limiting instruction; evidence admissible without March 2006–December 2007 extraneous acts being limited |
Key Cases Cited
- Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (standard for sufficiency review; rational juries may resolve conflicts)
- Wicker v. State, 667 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (credibility and testimonial weight resolved by jury)
- Matson v. State, 819 S.W.2d 839 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (verdict affirmed if elements proven beyond reasonable doubt)
- Fuentes v. State, 991 S.W.2d 267 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (credibility and evidence weighting reserved to jury)
- Sharp v. State, 707 S.W.2d 611 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (jury may assess credibility and resolve conflicts in testimony)
- Turro v. State, 867 S.W.2d 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Pomier v. State, 326 S.W.3d 373 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (course-of-conduct evidence admissible across time for stalking; relevance to fear at time of conduct)
- Clements v. State, 19 S.W.3d 442 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000) (extraneous conduct relevant to fear when proven before charged period)
- Delgado v. State, 235 S.W.3d 244 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (limiting instruction timing; if not requested with evidence, instruction not required later)
- Porter v. State, 709 S.W.2d 213 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (no limiting instruction needed when evidence admitted for main fact)