Hollins, Artavious Deon
PD-1331-15
| Tex. App. | Oct 16, 2015Background
- Artavious Hollins was tried jointly on indictments for murder and tampering with physical evidence; a jury convicted him of both and assessed life for murder and 25 years for tampering; sentences run concurrently.
- Facts: Hollins had ongoing verbal disputes with neighbors; prior incidents included windows and doors being damaged and taunting by neighbors.
- On Nov. 5, 2011, a confrontation escalated at Hollins’s apartment; the complainant (Derrick Williams) entered Hollins’s apartment, a struggle for a pink/chrome handgun ensued, a shot was fired, and Williams later died from a close‑range chest wound.
- Hollins fled the scene, discarding a white shirt, black hat, and a pink 9mm pistol; he later bought new clothes and left the area; officers and a canine later recovered the clothing and the pistol near each other, the gun hidden under a bush.
- Jury was instructed on alternative theories for murder (intent/knowingly causing death and intent to cause serious bodily injury via an act clearly dangerous to human life); the jury returned general guilty verdicts on both counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Hollins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency — murder: whether evidence shows Hollins intentionally or knowingly caused death | Evidence supports a conviction: Hollins pulled/cocked a deadly weapon, shot fired at close range, flight and disposal of gun/clothes indicate consciousness of guilt and intent | Hollins contends he was not aggressor, the shooting occurred during a struggle and was accidental; he did not know he shot Williams | Court: Evidence legally sufficient; jury could infer intent from use of a deadly weapon at close range, circumstances, and flight; conviction affirmed |
| Sufficiency — tampering: whether Hollins concealed/altered evidence with intent to impair availability | State argues Hollins discarded then concealed the firearm knowing an investigation was imminent (gun found hidden under bush after canine search) | Hollins contends he merely discarded the gun and clothes while fleeing and did not intend to hide evidence | Court: Evidence legally sufficient; jury could infer concealment and intent from location of items, timing, and canine discovery; conviction affirmed |
| Evidentiary — admission of officer testimony about footprint age | State sought to elicit officer’s observation that a muddy footprint on Hollins’s door was dry and thus older | Hollins objected that testimony was speculative and lacked foundation | Court: No reversible error; objections not preserved with sufficient specificity and trial court’s rulings were within its discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Williams v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (standard of review and deference to factfinder on credibility and inferences)
- Sorto v. State, 173 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (general verdicts and alternative theories: affirm if any theory supported)
- Forest v. State, 989 S.W.2d 365 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (firing a gun in direction of an individual is an act clearly dangerous to human life)
- Cantu v. State, 395 S.W.3d 202 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012) (context on accidental discharge and staged evidence distinctions)
- Lumpkin v. State, 129 S.W.3d 659 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004) (statutory interpretation of "pending" investigation for tampering)
- Childs v. State, 21 S.W.3d 631 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (presumption of intent to kill where deadly weapon fired at close range)