Joseph Weber v. State
03-16-00338-CR
| Tex. App. | Jan 12, 2017Background
- Joseph Weber lived with girlfriend Susan Smith and her two young sons, N.M. (approx. 4 when first disclosure) and E.W.; Smith reported sexualized behavior by N.M. and Weber then made incriminating admissions to investigators/police.
- Weber was indicted on five counts of aggravated sexual assault (victim N.M.), two counts of indecency with a child by exposure (victim N.M.), and one count of continuous sexual abuse (victims N.M. and E.W.).
- Jury convicted Weber of two aggravated sexual-assault counts, two indecency-by-exposure counts, and one count of continuous sexual abuse; jury recommended lengthy prison terms and the trial court entered judgments accordingly.
- The aggravated-assault counts alleged specific acts falling within the time period charged in the continuous-sexual-abuse count.
- Weber appealed arguing the jury charge permitted multiple punishments in violation of double jeopardy because the same acts/victim were the basis for both aggravated-assault and continuous-abuse convictions.
- The State agreed the convictions presented a double-jeopardy problem; the court of appeals analyzed statutory text and controlling precedent and addressed remedy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Weber) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether convicting Weber of both aggravated sexual assault (Counts I & II) and continuous sexual abuse (Count VI) for acts against the same victim during the same time period violated double jeopardy | Jury charge allowed convictions for aggravated assault and continuous abuse based on same acts/victim within the same charged period; convictions were not pleaded as alternatives or lesser-included | The State agreed the double-jeopardy problem existed and did not defend dual convictions in these circumstances | Court held double-jeopardy violation occurred and convictions for the two aggravated-sexual-assault counts must be vacated; continuous-abuse conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Price v. State, 434 S.W.3d 601 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (continuous-sexual-abuse statute construed to preclude dual convictions for continuous abuse and predicate acts committed against same victim during same period)
- Bigon v. State, 252 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (remedy for multiple punishments: affirm the most serious offense and vacate the others)
- Soliz v. State, 353 S.W.3d 850 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (predicate offenses listed in continuous-abuse statute are lesser-included offenses)
- Littrell v. State, 271 S.W.3d 273 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (sameness/multiple-punishment analysis centers on legislative intent)
- Ex parte Cavazos, 203 S.W.3d 333 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (most serious offense determined by greatest sentence assessed)
- Gonzales v. State, 304 S.W.3d 838 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (double jeopardy protects against multiple punishments in a single prosecution)