Juan Cerda Alvarado v. State
01-14-00894-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 22, 2016Background
- Juan Cerda Alvarado was convicted by a jury of aggravated sexual assault of an eight‑year‑old child and sentenced to 99 years’ confinement.
- The complainant (Joan) and her mother lived with Alvarado; the alleged incident occurred when Joan was showering and Alvarado exited the bathroom wet.
- Joan gave inconsistent initial answers to her mother but later told a forensic interviewer and a forensic nurse that Alvarado pulled her from the tub, put his penis in her anus, pressed on her stomach, and that similar assaults had occurred previously.
- A medical exam three days after the incident showed no anal trauma, and no DNA or other physical evidence was recovered; the examiner testified such absence of findings is common in children.
- At trial the State presented testimony from the mother, the forensic interviewer, the detective, the forensic nurse, and Joan; Alvarado presented no case in chief and attacked credibility on cross‑examination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Alvarado) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Legal sufficiency to prove anal contact/penetration by defendant’s sexual organ | Joan’s detailed description ("weenie inside her butt," felt "sticking up" and "squishy," pain, prior similar incidents, defendant’s body motion and hand placement) establishes penetration by a penis and intent | Joan never used the word "anus," never saw the penis, initially failed to identify Alvarado in court, and there was no DNA, trauma, or eyewitness corroboration | Evidence legally sufficient under Jackson to support that Alvarado penetrated Joan’s anus with his sexual organ; jury credibility determinations upheld |
| 2. Factual sufficiency of the evidence | N/A (State relies on legal sufficiency and jury verdict) | Argues the verdict is against the weight of evidence (relies on Clewis) | Court rejected factual‑sufficiency review as abolished by Brooks and applied only Jackson legal‑sufficiency standard; issue presents nothing for review |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (Sup. Ct. 1979) (legal‑sufficiency standard for criminal convictions)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (abolished Clewis factual‑sufficiency review; Jackson is sole standard)
- Carr v. State, 477 S.W.3d 335 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015) (complainant may rely on nonvisual senses to identify contact by sexual organ)
- Bargas v. State, 252 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (child’s unsophisticated terminology can suffice to prove sexual contact/penetration)
- Garcia v. State, 563 S.W.2d 925 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (complainant’s testimony can be sufficient to prove contact/penetration)