Luis Miguel Hernandez v. State
2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 11931
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Victim Devin Toler was killed after an altercation with Appellant Luis Miguel Hernandez at an apartment complex; Appellant had a table/place knife and admitted stabbing Toler.
- Appellant asserted self-defense; evidence included bystander testimony (Quionecia Barber) and Appellant’s post-arrest statement that Toler choked him and he had "no choice."
- Prosecution presented a provocation theory (that Appellant’s words provoked Toler) and the jury was charged on self-defense and provoking the difficulty.
- During closing, prosecutor argued Appellant called the victim and his family “niggas,” a statement not in the trial record; defense objected, court initially overruled, then sustained the objection outside jury presence and instructed “disregard the comment of Counsel.”
- Appellant did not move for a mistrial after the court’s instruction; he raised the issue in a motion for new trial.
- Court of Appeals: affirmed sufficiency and provocation instruction rulings, but found reversible error in the prosecutor’s racially inflammatory, out-of-record remark and the trial court’s inadequate curative instruction; reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence / self-defense | State: evidence supported murder conviction; jurors could disbelieve self-defense. | Hernandez: evidence showed he acted in self-defense; conviction unsupported. | Evidence sufficient — reasonable juror could reject self-defense; point overruled. |
| Provoking the difficulty jury charge | State: provocation instruction was supported by evidence; proper limitation on self-defense. | Hernandez: trial court erred in giving provocation instruction. | Charge proper — sufficient evidence to warrant instruction; point overruled. |
| Prosecutorial misconduct — racial slur in closing | State: prosecutor’s remark was a permissible inference from testimony that Appellant used racial slurs. | Hernandez: prosecutor injected an inflammatory, out-of-record racial slur that deprived him of a fair trial; curative instruction was inadequate. | Reversible error — prosecutor’s racially inflammatory out-of-record comment could not be cured by the vague instruction; conviction reversed and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (self-defense burden-shifting principles)
- Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (self-defense and jury factfinding)
- Smith v. State, 965 S.W.2d 509 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (provocation doctrine and instruction requirements)
- Elizondo v. State, 487 S.W.3d 185 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (analysis of provocation instruction affecting sole defense)
- Greer v. Miller, 483 U.S. 756 (U.S. 1987) (prosecutorial misconduct can violate due process when it infects trial with unfairness)
- Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (U.S. 1935) (prosecutorial misconduct may require new trial when it denies fair trial)
- McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (U.S. 1987) (racially or ethnically inflammatory prosecutorial remarks violate due process)