Mitchell v. State, 546 S.W.3d 780

On Jan. 1, 2016, deputies responded to a domestic disturbance at Huntington Apartments; Angelica Mitchell told officers Cardero Mitchell was inside and had a gun.
Mitchell jumped from a bedroom window, fled, and was tackled in the parking lot; during the struggle he removed Deputy Rangel’s holstered handgun and had control of it while officers attempted to restrain him.
Officers testified Mitchell fired one shot (after the magazine had been removed) and repeatedly tried to fire the weapon and pointed it at officers; a shot passed close to Lieutenant Zitzman’s thigh; bodycam/dashboard video was admitted.
Mitchell admitted he sought “suicide by cop,” grabbed officers’ guns to threaten suicide, and fired the gun but claimed he did not intend to hurt the officers (later conceding he put people at risk).
Jury convicted Mitchell of aggravated assault of a peace officer (first-degree felony) and sentenced him to 50 years; at punishment the State presented gang-expert testimony linking Mitchell to the 5-Deuce Hoova Crips based on tattoos and a database entry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Mitchell)	Held
Sufficiency of evidence on mental state and fear of imminent harm	Evidence (officers’ testimony, video, Mitchell’s admissions, he fired and tried to fire a gun) shows Mitchell acted intentionally/knowingly and officers feared imminent bodily injury	Mitchell claimed suicidal intent, not intent to harm officers; argued officers were not shown to be in fear of imminent harm	Affirmed: evidence sufficient to prove intent/knowledge and that officers feared imminent bodily harm
Admissibility of gang-expert testimony at punishment	Expert's qualifications, experience, tattoo analysis, and corroborating database entry made opinion reliable and relevant to character at punishment	Testimony unreliable (based primarily on tattoo) and irrelevant because Mitchell claimed past, not current, gang membership	Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion admitting the expert at punishment

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency review)
Acosta v. State, 429 S.W.3d 621 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (view evidence in light most favorable to verdict)
Dobbins v. State, 228 S.W.3d 761 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007) (intent may be inferred from acts and conduct)
Jones v. State, 500 S.W.3d 106 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016) (pointing a loaded gun supports aggravated-assault conviction)
Davis v. State, 329 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (Rule 702 gatekeeping factors: qualifications, reliability, relevance)
Garcia v. State, 239 S.W.3d 862 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007) (tattoos can be sound evidence of gang membership at punishment)
Ho v. State, 171 S.W.3d 295 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005) (past gang membership is relevant at punishment)
Phillips v. State, 534 S.W.3d 644 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017) (expert qualification focus on fit between expertise and subject)
Robinson v. State, 596 S.W.2d 130 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (display of deadly weapon constitutes a threat)
Patterson v. State, 639 S.W.2d 695 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (complainant’s fear testimony supports imminence of harm)