AP-77,022
Tex. App.Feb 24, 2015Background
- Murder of Sheryl Norris in 1975; Norris found in bathtub with ligature marks, victimology indicates rape, DNA later linked Jenkins to semen and a handprint
- Indictment charged capital murder under 19.03(a) for murder in the course of aggravated sexual assault
- Jenkins convicted by jury on capital murder after guilt phase; sentencing phase included special issues on deliberateness, future dangerousness, and mitigation
- DNA testing (1997, 1999, 2010) linked Jenkins to the crime; DNA profile matched CODIS to 'Willie Roy Jenkins'
- Defense challenged DNA handling and alleged trial errors; State's replies argue no reversible error and evidence supports death sentence
- Appellant sought relief on multiple points of error; State's brief-defenses argue issues waived or affirming trial court rulings
- Conclusion: jury validly found deliberateness and future danger; death sentence affirmed, with various challenges rejected
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for deliberateness | Jenkins | Jenkins argues insufficiency to prove deliberate death | Sufficiency upheld; evidence supports deliberateness |
| DNA evidence admissibility | State | DNA testing failed QA standards; should be suppressed | DNA properly admitted; no abuse of discretion |
| Mitigation evidence (plea and other) | State | Evidentiary support for plea or mitigation improperly excluded | No reversible error; evidence properly admitted/considered |
| Mistrial for juror misconduct | State | Mistrial should be granted due to juror misconduct | No abuse of discretion; remedial measures adequate |
| Cumulative error | State | Cumulative error requires reversal | No reversible cumulative error; individually minimal errors |
Key Cases Cited
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (no relief unless egregious harm; Almanza standard for trial-error review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1989) (sufficiency review standard for acknowledging guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000) (limits on sentencing enhancements based on facts found beyond the jury verdict)
- Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (U.S. 2000) (prosecution/discretionary death-penalty decisions cited to reject equal-protection claims)
- Wardrip v. State, 56 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (sufficiency of evidence/deliberateness standards in capital cases)