Jeremy Howard v. State
482 S.W.3d 249
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- Appellant Jeremy Howard convicted of first-degree aggravated robbery and punished with 30 years’ confinement.
- June 8–9, 2013 Tobacco Mart robbery in Houston; victims Virani and Gorman described, surveillance video admitted.
- Police interviews June 9, June 13, and June 21; rights warnings given, questions asked, no explicit waiver before questioning.
- Howard moved to suppress the three custodial statements; trial court denied.
- Trial evidence included officers’ testimony, video, and Howard’s statements; jury found him guilty and sentenced him.
- On appeal, Howard challenges suppression rulings and admission of post-Miranda counsel- invocation testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the June 9, 13, and 21 statements were valid waivers | Howard argues no knowing, intelligent waiver is shown | State contends totality of circumstances shows waiver | Waivers implied; denial of motion to suppress affirmed |
| Whether the June 21 invocation of right to counsel was admissible | Invocation should not be used as substantive evidence | State may present invocation as part of testimony within limits | Harmless error; conviction upheld despite admission of invocation testimony |
| Whether the June 21 statements could improperly influence jurors | Testimony improperly reflected invocation of rights | Evidence of guilt strong; impact minimal | Harmless beyond reasonable doubt under Rule 44.2(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- Joseph v. State, 309 S.W.3d 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (waiver of rights can be implied from totality of circumstances)
- Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (U.S. 2010) (explicit or implied waiver after warnings is required)
- Hargrove v. State, 162 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005) (implied waiver based on conduct after warnings)
- Oliver v. State, 29 S.W.3d 190 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2000) (invocation timing indicating waivers and statements)
- Turner v. State, 252 S.W.3d 571 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (implied waiver after understanding rights)
- Snowden v. State, 353 S.W.3d 815 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (constitutional harm analysis for errors)
- Kalisz v. State, 32 S.W.3d 718 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (considering weight of error when deciding harmlessness)