Isassi v. State
330 S.W.3d 633
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2010Background
- Appellant Alfred Isassi, Kleberg County Attorney, was charged with two counts of improper influence for allegedly attempting to influence outcomes in his aunt Anna Linda Gonzalez's criminal case.
- Gonzalez was arrested for evading arrest with a vehicle after a red-light incident; she was Bailed and required to report to pretrial services and appear in court.
- Isassi allegedly made a series of ex parte-like calls to pretrial services and prosecutors, suggesting Gonzalez would not be prosecuted or should avoid pretrial reporting.
- Evidence included (i) a call to pretrial-services coordinator Hernandez stating Gonzalez’s arrest would be rejected and not to report, and (ii) calls to ADA Trevino and pretrial officer Jimenez implying dismissal or leniency because Gonzalez was related to Isassi.
- The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held the evidence legally insufficient to prove intent to influence based on unauthorized considerations, reversing Isassi's conviction.
- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, holding that the State could prove improper influence if Isassi acted with intent to influence the outcome based on considerations not authorized by law, including familial relation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supports intent to influence | Isassi | Isassi | Yes; intent to influence established |
| Definition of improper influence mens rea | State | Isassi | Court adopts broader intent standard; requires improper purpose |
| Sufficiency standard for intent on appeal | State | Isassi | Court deferential to jury credibility; deems evidence sufficient |
Key Cases Cited
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (standard of review for legal sufficiency)
- Isassi v. State, S.W.3d (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (case at issue; discusses intent element)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1979) (reasonable-doubt standard for sufficiency)
- Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (evidence sufficiency; weighing inferences)
- United States v. Cintolo, 818 F.2d 980 (1st Cir. 1987) (corrupt intent under §1503; breadth of improper influence)
- United States v. Baker, 611 F.2d 964 (4th Cir. 1979) (advocacy by relationship can violate influence statute)
- Ogle, 613 F.2d 233 (10th Cir. 1980) (jury-nullification-like concerns; influence on juror)
- Fasolino, 449 F. Supp. 586 (D.C. N.Y. 1978) (ex parte communications with a judge may violate §1503)