Johnny Craig Trout v. State
11-13-00377-CR
| Tex. App. | Aug 28, 2015Background
- Appellant Johnny Craig Trout was indicted for first-degree burglary of a habitation with alleged aggravated-assault with a deadly weapon; jury convicted him of the lesser included second-degree burglary (entry and committing/attempting assault).
- Victims testified Trout forced entry, threatened to kill and lunged with a knife; eyewitness accounts conflicted about the type and presence of a knife.
- Deputies arrested Trout shortly after; a knife later was recovered by a private individual near storerooms but was destroyed by the sheriff’s office after Trout pled guilty to a separate protective-order violation.
- At trial Trout was represented by counsel; on appeal he proceeded pro se and filed deficient briefs that failed to comply with appellate rules.
- Trout raised (construed) issues of sufficiency of the evidence, excessive/cruel and unusual punishment, alleged Brady/grand-jury discovery violations, errors in the jury verdict form, and inaccuracies/missing items in the reporter’s record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Trout) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support burglary (assault element) | Evidence did not prove he committed/attempted an assault inside habitation | Witness testimony supported that he entered without consent and threatened/attempted to injure victims | Affirmed — evidence sufficient under Jackson/Brooks standard |
| Eighth Amendment excessive/cruel and unusual punishment | Five-year sentence (suspended) with fine and 180 days jail as condition of community supervision is excessive | Issue not preserved at trial; punishment within statutory range | Waived for appeal; claim overruled |
| Brady / grand-jury witness list / destroyed knife evidence | State withheld grand-jury info and destroyed material evidence (knife) | No authority cited; complaints not preserved and briefing insufficient | Waived/insufficient briefing; claim overruled |
| Jury verdict form / reporter’s record inaccuracies / missing tapes | Verdict form was handwritten improperly; reporter’s record contains errors; missing tape recordings | No authority or record cites; recordings were not admitted at trial; procedural defaults apply | Waived/insufficiently briefed; claims overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (applying Jackson standard in Texas)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecution duty to disclose material exculpatory evidence)
- Narvaiz v. State, 840 S.W.2d 415 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (errors waived if appellant fails to point to record location)
- Perez v. State, 261 S.W.3d 760 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (pro se litigants held to same procedural standards)