Edgar Garces Diaz v. State, 13-14-00675-CR

Background

On April 1, 2013, Mayra Oyervides was fatally shot outside her apartment; Leonel Garcia (her fiancé’s nephew) was the apparent target but uninjured. Surveillance showed two men (one in orange, one in blue) and a black minivan.
Police investigated and arrested co-defendants; Edgar Garces Diaz was arrested in August 2014 re-entering the U.S. from Mexico.
Diaz was videotaped in multiple custodial interviews; after initially invoking a desire to stop, he later waived rights and gave a confession in a third interview.
At trial the State presented the confession, eyewitness testimony identifying an orange-shirted shooter, vehicle/minivan evidence, and ballistics linking recovered casings and bullets to a single 9mm weapon.
The jury convicted Diaz of capital murder (retaliation) and aggravated assault. Diaz was removed after an outburst and initially sentenced in absentia; the case was remanded and he was later orally sentenced in person.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Suppression of statements — voluntariness & invocation of Miranda	Diaz: his post-arrest statements were obtained after he invoked his right to stop and were coerced (threats to arrest parents).	State: investigators honored invocation (ceased interview), re-approached next day after warnings; threats were not coercive because probable cause existed to arrest parents.	Trial court did not err — statement admissible; police scrupulously honored invocation and statement was voluntary.
2. Sufficiency of evidence for retaliation element of capital murder	Diaz: he intended to harm Garcia, not Oyervides; killing was panic/time-of-passion, not retaliation.	State: Diaz told police he shot at Oyervides because he believed she would call police; evidence supports intent to prevent reporting (retaliation).	Evidence legally sufficient to support retaliation as charged; conviction upheld.
3. Jury-charge error — omission of "benefit of the doubt" lesser-offense instruction	Diaz: trial court erred by refusing his requested instruction that would direct jury to resolve degree doubt in defendant’s favor.	State: charge already presented murder as a lesser count and properly instructed jury to consider murder if not guilty of capital murder.	Any charge error was not harmful under the Almanza standard given the charge, evidence, and arguments; no reversible error.
4. Sentencing in absentia	Diaz: sentencing without him present was error.	State: remedied by abatement and subsequent oral sentencing in Diaz’s presence.	Issue rendered moot — trial court later orally pronounced sentence in person; final judgment affirmed.

Key Cases Cited

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1966) (custodial interrogation warnings requirement)
Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 (U.S. 1975) (test for whether police "scrupulously honored" invocation of right to remain silent)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (appellate standard for reviewing legal sufficiency)
Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (deference to trial court findings on credibility and suppression hearings)