Ex Parte Navarijo
433 S.W.3d 558
Tex. Crim. App.2014Background
- Navarijo convicted in 1999 in Bexar County for aggravated sexual assault of a child, based on the complainant (his daughter) who was five at the outcry and seven at trial.
- Trial evidence included the complainant's detailed testimony and medical testimony showing signs of penetration; defense presented a videotaped prior recantation and multiple defense witnesses.
- Navarijo filed a 2012 habeas corpus application asserting newly available evidence—a 2011 recantation by the complainant—plus affidavits from the complainant, ex-wife Delia, and psychologist Dr. Murphey, and juror affidavits.
- Habeas court found the recantation credible and more credible than trial testimony, applying Ex parte Elizondo to grant relief; the court suggested the corroborative effect of the recantation would acquit Navarijo.
- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals independently weighed the new evidence against the trial record, rejected relief, and denied the writ, holding the recantation did not unquestionably establish innocence and that medical evidence remained persuasive against discharge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recantation proves no reasonable juror would convict | Navarijo contends recantation, viewed with new evidence, shows innocence | State argues recantation is vague, memory-limited, and insufficient to overcome medical evidence | Denied relief; recantation not conclusively establishing innocence |
| Reliance on habeas court credibility determinations | Habeas credibility finding should control | Elizondo requires weighing all evidence, not sole credibility | Rejected; court must weigh the entire record and deny relief |
| Medical evidence undermined by recantation | Recantation explains medical signs | Medical findings remained highly probative of abuse | Denied relief; medical evidence supports guilt despite recantation |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (establishes clear-and-convincing standard for actual innocence and weighing new evidence against trial record)
- Ex parte Brown, 205 S.W.3d 538 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (recantation must be more than vague and memory-based)
- Ex parte Thompson, 153 S.W.3d 416 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (consideration of medical evidence in evaluating innocence)
- Ex parte Tuley, 109 S.W.3d 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (articulates standard for actual-innocence review)
- Ex parte Harmon, 116 S.W.3d 778 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (establishes framework for actual-innocence analysis)
- Ex parte Reed, 271 S.W.3d 698 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (illustrates weighing exculpatory evidence against guilt)
- Ex parte Franklin, 72 S.W.3d 671 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (defines freestanding innocence claim concepts)
- Ex parte Weinstein, 421 S.W.3d 656 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (standard for mixed questions of law and fact in habeas review)
- Ex parte Chavez, 371 S.W.3d 200 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (affects deference to habeas findings and credibility)
- Ex parte Flores, 387 S.W.3d 626 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (limits of appellate reversal for credibility-based findings)