Hernandez v. State
351 S.W.3d 156
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Hernandez was convicted of deadly conduct and sentenced to 10 years in the penitentiary.
- Enrique Garza sought Hernandez's help after a dispute; they left in a car owned by Amanda Morrow.
- Garza testified Hernandez fired three shots from the driver's side window toward four people on a porch.
- Morrow testified during cross that Hernandez lived with her and treated her and her children well.
- The State sought to admit Hernandez's prior felony conviction after defense opened with Hernandez being a “good guy.”
- The court allowed questioning about the prior conviction; defense objected; appeal contends this was improper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion admitting prior-conviction evidence. | Hernandez argues the cross-examination did not open the door to extraneous evidence. | State contends the evidence rebutted a false impression of law-abiding behavior. | No reversible error; admission proper under theory that cross-exam opened door. |
Key Cases Cited
- Delk v. State, 855 S.W.2d 700 (Tex.Crim.App.1993) (opening door by creating false impression of law-abiding conduct allows extraneous evidence)
- Prescott v. State, 744 S.W.2d 128 (Tex.Crim.App.1988) (impeachment by specific acts generally not allowed; exceptions when false impression created)
- Ex parte Moreno, 245 S.W.3d 419 (Tex.Crim.App.2008) (overruled other grounds; impacts related holdings)
- Gonzalez v. State, 195 S.W.3d 114 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (trial court decision sustained if correct on any theory of law)
- Wilson v. State, 71 S.W.3d 346 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (cross-exam may test good-character witness by asking about specific misconduct)
- Harrison v. State, 241 S.W.3d 23 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) (defense character testimony can open door for prior-act questions)
- McDuff v. State, 939 S.W.2d 607 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (admission of evidence permissible if supported by theory of law)
- Theus v. State, 845 S.W.2d 874 (Tex.Crim.App.1992) (requires more than a mere implication of law-abiding conduct to open the door)
- Abshire v. State, 62 S.W.3d 857 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2001) (discussion of when past conduct admissible to rebut character)
- Wilson v. State, 71 S.W.3d 346 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (cross-exam about knowledge of specific instances of conduct)