Jason Kyle Gee v. State
02-15-00460-CR
| Tex. App. | Apr 6, 2017Background
- Jason Kyle Gee was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (knife) for slashing Clifton Skinner’s throat; he was sentenced to 75 years’ imprisonment.
- The altercation arose after a drug transaction dispute: Gee and others believed Skinner shorted them on methamphetamine; all involved had used meth that day.
- Gee approached Skinner’s car with a knife, attempted to slash a tire as Skinner drove off, and later, during a confrontation after Skinner circled back, Gee cut Skinner’s throat, causing serious injury requiring emergency surgery.
- Witnesses (including Skinner, Puckett, Nabors, Combs, and Drury) testified that Skinner did not display or threaten deadly force; some testified Gee provoked the incident by brandishing/attempting to stab the tire.
- Gee testified he feared for his life, believed Skinner might have pulled a weapon, and acted in self-defense; he admitted he never actually saw a weapon in Skinner’s hands.
- The jury charge included self-defense instructions; the jury convicted (implicitly rejecting self-defense). Gee appealed, arguing insufficient evidence to disprove his claim of justifiable self-defense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Gee) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to disprove self-defense | Evidence supports conviction; jury could find no reasonable belief of imminent deadly force | Gee claimed he reasonably believed deadly force was immediately necessary because Skinner approached and may have had a weapon | Affirmed: viewing evidence in favor of verdict, jury could reject self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Applicability of statutory presumption that deadly force belief was reasonable (Tex. Penal Code §9.32(b)) | Even if requirements met, presumption inapplicable because Gee was engaged in criminal activity (meth transaction) | Gee argued presumption applied because Skinner was attempting to enter/extract him from vehicle and Gee did not provoke | Held presumption need not apply; jury could rationally find Gee was committing criminal activity (drug offense), so no presumption |
| Credibility of Gee’s fear claim | Witness testimony contradicted Gee’s account; jury decides weight/credibility | Gee’s testimony: subjective fear and belief Skinner might have a weapon | Court defers to jury credibility findings; it could disbelieve Gee and accept State witnesses |
| Whether evidence established aggravated assault elements despite self-defense evidence | State must prove assault and disprove self-defense beyond reasonable doubt; evidence met standard | Gee contended his actions were justified as self-defense | Court: rational juror could find elements of aggravated assault and reject self-defense; conviction stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (established constitutional standard for sufficiency review)
- Murray v. State, 457 S.W.3d 446 (discussing deference to factfinder on credibility and inferences)
- Dobbs v. State, 434 S.W.3d 166 (factfinder as sole judge of credibility)
- Montgomery v. State, 369 S.W.3d 188 (prohibition on reweighing evidence on sufficiency review)
- Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589 (defendant’s burden to produce some evidence of self-defense)
- Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910 (guilty verdict is implicit rejection of self-defense)
- Dotson v. State, 146 S.W.3d 285 (procedure for sufficiency review when self-defense raised)
- Bottenfield v. State, 77 S.W.3d 349 (jury may accept or reject any witness testimony)
- Barrios v. State, 389 S.W.3d 382 (statutory presumption inapplicable when accused engaged in criminal activity)