Larrinaga, Alcides
PD-1277-15
| Tex. App. | Sep 30, 2015Background
- Appellant Alcides Larrinaga was convicted of murder and sentenced to 50 years’ confinement after a jury trial, following a true-basis habitual offender finding.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction; Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
- Trial court denied Appellant’s requested jury instruction under Tex. Penal Code §9.32(b) (the presumption of imminent necessity for deadly force) on grounds Appellant was a felon in possession of a firearm.
- Tex. Penal Code §9.32(b)(3) precludes the presumption if the actor is engaged in criminal activity; possession of a firearm by a felon is a third-degree felony.
- The State introduced autopsy photographs; evidence of self-defense and the admissibility of autopsy photos under Rule 403 was contested.
- A police detective’s opinion—whether the autopsy injuries indicated self-defense—was admitted, analyzed under Rule 701 (lay opinion) and deemed harmless in light of other testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether felon in possession precludes §9.32(b) presumptions | Larrinaga argues §9.32(b)(3) does not cover felon-in-possession; presumption should apply | State argues felon in possession is criminal activity precluding the presumption | No error; felon-in-possession qualifies as criminal activity precluding the presumption |
| Whether autopsy-photo evidence was admissible under Rule 403 | Autopsy photo unfairly prejudiced; probative value minimal | Photo probative for self-defense; other autopsy photos were admissible | Admissible; not an abuse of discretion; prejudicial effect outweighed by probative value |
| Whether the detective could testify as to self-defense based on autopsy injuries | Detective lacked expert qualification; opinion should be excluded | Detective qualified by experience; opinion helpful to jury | Admissible lay testimony under Rule 701; harmless error beyond reasonable doubt |
Key Cases Cited
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (standard for Almanza review of jury-charge issues)
- Elizondo v. State, 13-12-00028-CR (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 2013) (unpublished opinion on self-defense issues)
- Hernandez v. State, 726 S.W.2d 53 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986) (self-defense principles in Texas law)
- Jackson v. State, 17 S.W.3d 664 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000) (standard for reviewing evidentiary rulings and expert/testimony)
- Kelly v. State, 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992) (reliability requirements for scientific evidence)
- Ngo v. State, 175 S.W.3d 738 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005) (requirement to include defensive issues in jury charge)
- Russeau v. State, 171 S.W.3d 871 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005) (Rule 702 analysis for expert testimony; reliability framework)
- Weatherred v. State, 15 S.W.3d 540 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000) (standard for admissibility of expert testimony)
- Webber v. State, 29 S.W.3d 226 (Tex.App.—Hou. 14th Dist. 2000) (context for self-defense and evidentiary issues)
- Willis v. State, 790 S.W.2d 307 (Tex.Crim.App. 1990) (historical self-defense presumptions)