Ex Parte Gutierrez
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 595
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2011Background
- Appellant Gutierrez was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for participating in the robbery and murder of Escolastica Harrison.
- Harrison had about $600,000 in cash hidden in her home; Gutierrez knew of the money and helped plan the robbery.
- Evidence included Gutierrez’s statements and accomplices’ statements placing him at Harrison’s trailer park during or around the murder.
- Gutierrez sought appointment of counsel under Article 64.01(c) to file a motion for post-conviction DNA testing, and the trial court denied
- Gutierrez then filed a motion for post-conviction DNA testing; the trial court denied it, and the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether reasonable grounds exist for filing a DNA motion | Gutierrez: exculpatory DNA could negate guilt | Gutierrez: no reasonable grounds; identity not at issue | No reasonable grounds found. |
| Whether Gutierrez was at fault for not seeking testing at trial | Gutierrez: trial strategy delayed testing due to evidence access | Gutierrez failed to pursue testing despite available DNA technology | Gutierrez at fault; no no-fault basis under 64.01(b)(1)(B). |
| Whether the single loose hair existed and was deliverable for testing | Hair existed per autopsy; evidence collection unclear | Hair not available; no chain of custody; hair not recoverable | Hair not available for testing; trial court findings upheld. |
| Whether identity was an issue in the case for purposes of Chapter 64 | Statements placing Gutierrez inside home raise identity issue | Identity not at issue due to party theory and corroborating statements | Identity not an issue; findings affirmed. |
| Whether exculpatory DNA results would have changed the outcome | Exculpatory DNA could show not a party to the murder | DNA would not overcome overwhelming evidence of Gutierrez’s participation | Appellant failed to show a >50% chance of acquittal; relief denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rivera v. State, 89 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (almost de novo review of legal questions; identity considerations)
- Prible v. State, 245 S.W.3d 466 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (exculpatory evidence must show innocence; Chapter 64 scope)
- Blacklock v. State, 235 S.W.3d 231 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (exculpatory DNA evidence must show innocence; identity not at issue)
- Kutzner v. State, 75 S.W.3d 427 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (statutory interpretation of DNA testing rights)
- Esparza v. State, 282 S.W.3d 913 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (limits of exculpatory DNA to innocence, not punishment)
- Rivera v. State, 89 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (deference to historical findings; credibility determinations)