Background

• Garcia convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child under Tex. Penal Code §21.02 based on the complainant GA's testimony.
• GA disclosed abuse to school personnel; defense challenged credibility; state argued credibility evidence could be bolstered by others' belief.
• Trial court overruled objections to prosecutorial bolstering in closing; court instructed the jurors they were the exclusive judges of credibility.
• Appellant argued the improper closing argument violated due process and harmed substantial rights; the court of appeals found error but treated it as harmless.
• Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, holding that the error was harmless given GA's extensive testimony and the court's limiting instructions; conviction affirmed.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) (prosecutor cannot tell jury to believe witnesses because investigators or others do)
• Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (three-factor harm test for improper argument)
• Lopez v. State, 288 S.W.3d 148 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2009) (non-constitutional error—harm analysis when evidence not overwhelming)
• Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 (1963) (constitutional standard for whether error influenced conviction)
• Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750 (1946) (error substantial influence standard for conviction sufficiency)
• Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for legal sufficiency of evidence)
• Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (deferential standard of review for jury verdicts)
• Rabb v. State, 434 S.W.3d 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (evidence sufficiency review guides conviction verdict)