Michael Alan Hodges v. State
06-16-00067-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 21, 2016Background
- Michael Hodges (63) was convicted by a jury of two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for stabbing Anthony Scott and Mark Cashaw; sentenced to 25 years on each count.
- Incident: Hodges admitted using a knife; victims testified Hodges stabbed them during an altercation in an apartment parking lot. Victims said two men (Scott and Cashaw) fought with Hodges.
- Hodges’ self-defense theory: he claimed multiple assailants (four men approached), he was kicked and attacked, and he reasonably feared for his safety before using a knife. A neighbor witnessed multiple men but her testimony was equivocal and contradicted by other evidence.
- Police and victim testimony indicated only two assailants and no observable injuries on Hodges when arrested; Hodges’ statements to police initially described two attackers and did not mention being kicked.
- The trial court’s jury charge contained standard self-defense and deadly-force instructions but did not include a specific multiple-assailant instruction; Hodges did not request that instruction at trial.
- The jury rejected self-defense on both counts and convicted Hodges; on appeal he argued the omission of a multiple-assailant instruction was reversible error.
Issues
| Issue | Hodges' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether omission of a multiple-assailant instruction in the charge was reversible error | Trial court should have instructed jury on right to defend against multiple assailants because there was evidence Hodges believed multiple people threatened him | Omission was not reversible because the charge otherwise allowed consideration of all facts and the jury was not egregiously harmed | Court: Error in omitting such an instruction existed, but Hodges was not egregiously harmed; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Mata v. State, 939 S.W.2d 719 (Tex. App.—Waco 1997) (defendant entitled to multiple-assailant instruction if any evidence he believed attack by more than one person)
- Frank v. State, 688 S.W.2d 863 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (same principle regarding multiple assailants)
- Sanders v. State, 632 S.W.2d 346 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (restriction of self-defense to single assailant is error when evidence supports multiple attackers)
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (standard for reviewing jury-charge error and harm)
- Riggs v. State, 482 S.W.3d 270 (Tex. App.—Waco 2016) (applies Almanza review framework)