Joseph Rodriguez v. State, 368 S.W.3d 821

Appellant Joseph Rodriguez was convicted of murder and sentenced to 40 years' imprisonment.
The trial involved joint trial of Rodriguez and Gomez on murder charges based on a setup involving a drug-trafficking dispute with the Alanis family.
Evidence showed gunfire in 2009 by occupants of a vehicle in which Rodriguez and Gomez allegedly participated.
Rodriguez gave multiple recorded statements admitting varying levels of participation and later claimed his father forced him to participate.
During punishment, the State introduced evidence of a prior related shooting; the defense sought a self-defense instruction, which the court denied.
Rodriguez appealed alleging (a) error in denying a duress instruction during guilt-innocence and (b) improper denial of cross-examination in punishment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Duress instruction during guilt-innocence	Rodriguez	State	No error; duress instruction denied
Exclusion of self-defense evidence in punishment phase	Rodriguez	State	Issue not reached on merits; not preserved for appeal

Shaw v. State, 243 S.W.3d 647 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (confession-and-avoidance/justification nature of duress defenses; admission required to trigger instruction)
Juarez v. State, 308 S.W.3d 398 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (confession-and-avoidance framework for affirmative defenses)
Maldonado v. State, 902 S.W.2d 708 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1995) (requires admission to underlying offense for defense entitlement)
Allen v. State, 971 S.W.2d 715 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998) (admission requirement for defensive instruction)
Bernal v. State, 647 S.W.2d 699 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1983) (denial of duress instruction where defendant did not admit crimes)