Frederick Jerome Roberts v. State
07-14-00413-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 14, 2016Background
- In April 2014 at a park in Vernon, TX, Frederick Jerome Roberts was accused of shooting at Sport Fobbs after an earlier confrontation; multiple eyewitnesses testified Roberts fired a handgun at Fobbs.
- Victims/witnesses: Fobbs, Kametria Daniels, Shatara Scott, Darrell Straughter and others testified they saw Roberts shoot; Williams (Roberts’ partner) gave conflicting testimony, saying she did not see Roberts with a gun and suggested someone else may have had a gun.
- A black revolver was recovered in front of the Trailblazer Roberts was driving; no fingerprints or gunshot residue were conclusively linked to Roberts.
- After the shooting Roberts fled in the vehicle; a marked patrol car activated lights/siren and pursued; Roberts abandoned the vehicle and ran before officers apprehended him.
- Roberts had a prior felony conviction (Dec. 2010, two years’ confinement); the shooting occurred less than five years after his release.
- A jury convicted Roberts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, evading arrest with a vehicle, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon; court assessed sentences totaling 75, 20, and 10 years. Roberts appealed on four grounds; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Roberts) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated assault (intentional/threatening use of firearm) | Witness testimony established Roberts pointed and fired a gun at Fobbs and threatened him; supports intentional/knowing threat with a deadly weapon. | Conflicting testimony (especially Williams) shows uncertainty who fired; at most reckless shooting toward Fobbs, not intentional threatening conduct. | Affirmed. A rational juror could credit multiple eyewitnesses that Roberts intentionally shot at Fobbs and reject self-defense. |
| Denial of jury instruction on self-defense (fair trial) | No defensive instruction required because evidence supporting self-defense was insufficient; defendant did not substantially admit the charged conduct. | Williams’ testimony suggested Fobbs may have had a gun and Roberts was fleeing because he thought they were trying to kill him; thus self-defense issue was raised. | Affirmed. Williams’ testimony did not amount to a substantial admission of the charged conduct; the legal prerequisites for a self-defense instruction were not met. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon | Prior felony conviction + evidence the shooting occurred within five years of release + testimony Roberts kept/handled guns at home supports possession conviction. | Argues the State failed to prove possession of the recovered firearm by Roberts within five years. | Affirmed. Evidence permitted a rational factfinder to conclude unlawful possession. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for evading arrest with a vehicle | Patrol video and officer testimony established a marked patrol car activated lights/siren, pursued Roberts’ vehicle, Roberts sped up, violated traffic control, and abandoned the vehicle to run — demonstrating knowledge of attempted arrest and intentional flight. | Argues the record lacks evidence Roberts knew officers were attempting to arrest/detain him while he drove (compares to Redwine). | Affirmed. Unlike Redwine, the record here showed lights/siren and conduct (speeding, fleeing) from which a juror could infer Roberts knew officers were attempting to detain/arrest him. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (defendant has initial burden to produce evidence of self-defense)
- Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (conviction implies rejection of self-defense; jury weighs credibility)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (legal-sufficiency standard: view evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
- Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (use of hypothetically correct jury charge for sufficiency review)
- Granger v. State, 3 S.W.3d 36 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (defendant entitled to defensive instruction on every issue raised by the evidence)
- Martinez v. State, 775 S.W.2d 645 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (defendant’s admission of conduct can entitle him to self-defense instruction)
- Redwine v. State, 305 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (distinguished; insufficient evidence defendant knew deputies were attempting to arrest while driving)