Fernando Hernandez, Jr. A.K.A. Fernando Junior Hernandez v. State
2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 12447
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Hernandez pleaded open guilty to intoxication manslaughter and to failing to render aid after a fatal crash; plea included an enhancement making each a first-degree offense for sentencing purposes.
- At sentencing the court heard testimony from Hernandez and admitted State exhibits (10 photos, 5 documents) under a defense–State agreement; defense counsel stated "no objection."
- The State introduced unobjected testimony and a photograph of alleged prior bad acts (including an underage sexual relationship and domestic incidents) as punishment evidence.
- The trial court announced guilt and a 45-year sentence for the intoxication manslaughter count (Count I) and found the enhancement true; the court did not announce a finding of guilt or pronounce sentence on the failure-to-render-aid count (Count II).
- Written judgments were entered for both counts; Hernandez filed a motion for new trial (overruled by operation of law) and appealed.
- The court of appeals reversed the judgment on Count II for lack of a pronounced sentence and affirmed Count I, rejecting Hernandez’s preserved and unpreserved confrontation and extraneous-offense challenges as not constituting fundamental error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of written judgment for Count II (failure to render aid) | Trial court omitted a finding of guilt and did not pronounce sentence; written judgment is invalid | State did not contest practical remedy | Court reversed Count II and remanded because failure to pronounce sentence invalidates judgment |
| Admission of State exhibits (photographs and reports) at sentencing — Confrontation Clause | Hernandez: admission without live witness or specific waiver violated Sixth Amendment; fundamental error because no express waiver at sentencing | State: Hernandez waived confrontation in his written plea waiver and counsel agreed to exhibits in exchange for admitting defense letters | Court: Issue not preserved; under Marin framework Confrontation is forfeitable; counsel expressly agreed to exhibits, so no fundamental error; claim overruled |
| Admission of testimony/photo of extraneous offenses at sentencing | Hernandez: admission of unobjected extraneous-offense evidence and photo was fundamentally erroneous and tainted punishment | State: Article 37.07 permits extraneous-offense evidence at sentencing; evidence was admissible and no objection was made | Court: Issue not preserved and not fundamental error; overruled |
| Harm from alleged errors (excessive/erroneous punishment) | Hernandez: combined errors produced erroneous punishment beyond State’s recommendation | State: Sentence (45 years) within statutory range for enhanced offense; trial court discretion | Court: No fundamental error shown; sentence within statutory range and affirmed for Count I |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. State, 108 S.W.3d 287 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (failure to pronounce sentence invalidates written judgment)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (Confrontation Clause bars admission of testimonial out-of-court statements absent prior opportunity for cross-examination)
- Marin v. State, 851 S.W.2d 275 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (categorization of rights as forfeitable vs. nonwaivable for preservation/fundamental-error analysis)
- Anderson v. State, 301 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (Confrontation-rights as forfeitable under Marin)
- Stringer v. State, 241 S.W.3d 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (plea-waiver applicability to sentencing confronted in context of confrontation rights)
- Jackson v. State, 680 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (trial court has broad discretion to impose sentence within statutory range)
- Mendez v. State, 138 S.W.3d 334 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (limits of error-preservation rules and fundamental-error exception)