Larry Donnell Boswell, Jr. v. State, 03-15-00540-CR

On June 11, 2015, a jury convicted Larry Donnell Boswell, Jr. of murder; because the State did not seek death, Boswell was sentenced to life without parole.\
The State’s case relied principally on testimony from accomplices (Paul Sterling, Daniel “D.C.” Carruth, others) that Boswell, identified as a leader of the Gangster Disciples (G.D.), ordered or participated in a robbery that resulted in Ricky Brandon’s death.\
The prosecution called former police sergeant and gang expert John Bowman, who testified at length about the G.D., identified Boswell as the G.D. “Governor,” and explained tattoos and gang symbols; the trial court ordered Boswell to remove his shirt so the jury could see tattoos.\
Defense objected at trial to gang-affiliation evidence under Tex. R. Evid. 401, 402, 403, and 404(b); the trial court overruled and admitted extensive gang-related testimony and exhibits.\
After conviction, Boswell moved for a new trial arguing Brady violations: the State failed to disclose Bowman’s disciplinary records (a 56‑day unpaid suspension and other policy-violation admissions leading to retirement), which defense counsel said impeached Bowman’s credibility and showed bias; the trial court denied the motion.\

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Boswell)	Held (trial-court posture)
Admissibility of gang-membership evidence (Rules 401/402/403/404(b))	Gang evidence is relevant to motive, identity, plan, and how witnesses identified defendant.	Gang evidence was irrelevant to elements, was character conformity, and unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403; tattoos/photos sufficed without live display.	Trial court admitted the gang evidence over defense objection.
Brady — failure to disclose expert’s disciplinary records	(Implicit) Records not required or not material to outcome.	Omitted disciplinary records were Brady material: impeachment/bias evidence that would have undermined Bowman and corroboration he provided.	Trial court denied new-trial relief on Brady claim.
Impeachment/bias — materiality of undisclosed records	(Implicit) Not material or otherwise cumulative.	Records showed motive (career advancement), prior misstatements to supervisors, and would have impeached/veracity and bias on cross-exam.	Trial court found no basis for granting new trial (denied).
Harm / prejudice from admission and nondisclosure	(Implicit) Evidence and nondisclosed material did not affect substantial rights.	Admission of gang evidence dominated closing and corroborated accomplices; nondisclosure of Bowman’s records undermines confidence in verdict (reasonable probability of different outcome).	Appellant argues prejudice; trial court denied relief; appeal presents these arguments for reversal.

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (prosecutor must disclose materially favorable evidence to defendant)
Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (impeachment evidence and promise/benefit to witnesses must be disclosed)
Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (materiality: whether suppressed evidence undermines confidence in outcome)
Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (state cannot present testimony known to be false or allow perjured testimony to go uncorrected)
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (Brady/Bagley materiality standard: reasonable probability affecting verdict)
Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (interest/motive of witness is critical cross-examination material)
Martin v. State, 173 S.W.3d 463 (Tex. Crim. App.) (Rule 404(b) / admissibility framework)
Gigliobianco v. State, 210 S.W.3d 637 (Tex. Crim. App.) (Rule 403 balancing factors)
Montgomery v. State, 821 S.W.2d 14 (Tex. App. — Dallas) (discussion of Rule 403 factors and prejudice)
Harm v. State, 183 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App.) (Brady duty and standard for nondisclosure)