Jones v. State
500 S.W.3d 106
Tex. App.2016Background
- In summer 2012 Bobby Joe Jones Jr. (appellant) lived with his parents; late one night complainants Matt DeKay and David Curry went to the Joneses’ home after noticing damage to Matt’s truck.\
- A confrontation occurred outside the house; witnesses testified appellant came outside with a handgun, fired shots, and (per Matt and David) pointed the gun and threatened to kill them.\
- Three defense witnesses (appellant’s father Senior, mother Joanie, and son BJ) testified appellant fired the gun into the air to scare the men and did not point it at them.\
- Police recovered a 9mm shell casing and the firearm hidden near the house; appellant was arrested the next morning.\
- A jury convicted appellant of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon as to Matt (acquitted as to David). Appellant appealed, challenging evidentiary sufficiency and trial counsel’s effectiveness.\
- The trial court sentenced appellant to five years’ confinement, probated for ten years; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency: intent/threat to Matt | Evidence did not show appellant intentionally/knowingly threatened Matt or had requisite mens rea | Testimony that appellant pointed a gun, threatened to kill, fired, and victim feared for life supports conviction | Affirmed — evidence sufficient to prove intentional/knowing threat while exhibiting a firearm |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to cross-examine witnesses | Counsel erred by not cross-examining complainants and officers | Strategic choice to avoid bolstering witnesses; record silent on strategy so strong presumption of competence applies | Affirmed — no showing that omission was so outrageous no competent counsel would do it |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to obtain ruling on speedy-trial motion | Counsel failed to secure hearing/ruling on motion to dismiss for speedy-trial violations after ~2-year delay | Record does not show reason for delay or prejudice; no showing the motion would have succeeded | Affirmed — no evidence counsel’s omission was deficient or prejudicial |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to present experts | Counsel failed to call crime-scene reconstruction or intoxication experts | No evidence experts were available or would have helped; record silent on counsel’s strategy or financial constraints | Affirmed — appellant did not overcome presumption counsel acted reasonably |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for sufficiency review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (four-factor speedy-trial analysis)
- Fagan v. State, 362 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. App.) (pointing a loaded gun is threatening conduct supporting aggravated assault)
- Ex parte Briggs, 187 S.W.3d 458 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005) (counsel ineffective when failure to pursue experts resulted from economic, not strategic, choice)