Luis Sanchez v. State
460 S.W.3d 675
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- Luis Sanchez was convicted of third-degree felony assault-family violence for impeding the victim’s breathing by wrapping a cord around her neck and other violent acts on Dec. 18, 2009; sentence: 6 years + $7,500 fine.
- Victim Rachael Price lived with Sanchez from ~2006 until the assault; they were in a common-law marriage and had a child; she later filed for and obtained a divorce before the criminal trial.
- Rachael reported multiple assaults culminating on Dec. 18 (beatings, knife to throat, cord around neck), reported injuries, and photographs of injuries taken two days later were admitted.
- Detective obtained medical records showing prior injuries and an admission by Rachael that Sanchez caused earlier injuries; Sanchez failed to appear for a voluntary police interview; a grand jury indicted him under Penal §22.01(b)(2)(B) alleging the victim was a person with whom he “has or has had” a dating relationship per Family Code §71.0021.
- At trial Sanchez pleaded not guilty; the court found him guilty. He appealed only on sufficiency grounds: (1) whether the State proved the specific charged statutory element (a person with whom he “has or has had” a dating relationship) given the spouses’ status, and (2) whether the evidence proved assault.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Sanchez) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved the indictment element that the victim was a person with whom Sanchez “has or has had” a dating relationship (to elevate misdemeanor to 3rd‑degree felony) | The statutory phrase “has or has had” covers past dating relationships even if the relationship was not ongoing at the time of the assault; evidence showed a past dating/romantic relationship | Sanchez argued they were married at the time (common‑law marriage), so she was not a person he “has or has had” a dating relationship; thus State failed to prove the specific charged alternative element | Court held “have had” may encompass a past continuing romantic/intimate relationship; because Sanchez and Price previously had such a relationship, the charged element was satisfied (affirming felony-level allegation) |
| Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove Sanchez committed assault (causing bodily injury/impeding breathing) | Victim’s testimony, photographs of injuries, medical records of prior assaults, and the circumstantial evidence support finding of assault beyond a reasonable doubt | Sanchez challenged victim credibility, argued marks were minor and inconsistent explanations undermined proof | Court held evidence (victim testimony + photos + records) was sufficient for a rational factfinder to find assault beyond a reasonable doubt |
Key Cases Cited
- Gollihar v. State, 46 S.W.3d 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (variance doctrine and focus on elements alleged in the indictment)
- Cada v. State, 334 S.W.3d 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (State must prove the specific statutory element pleaded; sufficiency measured against pleaded alternative)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence; evidence must permit a rational trier of fact to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Gross v. State, 380 S.W.3d 181 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (appellate review standards: defer to factfinder on credibility and inferences)
- Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (factfinder is sole judge of witness credibility)
- Harris v. State, 359 S.W.3d 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (statutory construction principles; examine text and context)