Jay Paul Yzaguirre v. State
367 S.W.3d 927
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Jay Paul Yzaguirre was indicted in Dallas County for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon.
- A jury found Yzaguirre guilty and sentenced him to 30 years' imprisonment.
- Defense requested instructions on the lesser-included offense of robbery; the trial court denied.
- The evidence showed a robbery occurred with a gun; some testimony suggested Yzaguirre may not have used or exhibited a weapon.
- The trial court charged the jury on the law of parties abstractly but did not apply it in the application paragraph, affecting potential liability.
- On appeal, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial due to error in the jury charge regarding the lesser-included offense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the defendant was entitled to a lesser-included offense instruction on robbery. | Yzaguirre argues there was evidence he could be guilty of robbery only. | The State contends no instruction was warranted given the evidence and theory of party liability. | Yes; the instruction was error and requires reversal for a new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hall v. State, 158 S.W.3d 470 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (two-prong test for lesser-included offenses; record must show potential for lesser offense)
- Hampton v. State, 109 S.W.3d 437 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (scope of lesser-included offense eligibility)
- Lofton v. State, 45 S.W.3d 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (relevant considerations for lesser-included offenses)
- Bignall v. State, 887 S.W.2d 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (criteria for lesser-included offenses)
- Little v. State, 659 S.W.2d 425 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (definition of lesser-included offenses)
- McKinney v. State, 12 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000) (application of lesser-included offense doctrine)
- Sarmiento v. State, 93 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002) (evidence of weapon use can be established by party liability)
- Ferrel v. State, 55 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (any evidence beyond scintilla supports a lesser-included instruction)
- Campbell v. State, 910 S.W.2d 475 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (abstract theory must be applied to facts in charge)
- Clark v. State, 929 S.W.2d 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (law of parties must be applied to facts for instruction)
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (harm standard for trial court errors)
- Abdnor v. State, 871 S.W.2d 726 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (any harm from error triggers reversal)