Morgan v. State
2016 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1129
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2016Background
- In 2012 Morgan moved in with his girlfriend, Regina Raglin; she alone held the lease, paid rent, and gave him a key; his license did not list the address.
- After an April 2013 domestic incident, Morgan continued to live there. On June 20, 2013, following an argument, Regina locked the deadbolt to keep Morgan out.
- Morgan broke a window, kicked in the door, entered, and assaulted Regina; police arrested him. The State charged burglary of a habitation.
- At trial the jury was instructed using the Penal Code definitions of “owner” (title, possession, or greater right to possession) and “effective consent.” The jury convicted Morgan.
- The Second Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning Morgan was a cotenant (an “owner”) and Regina had not terminated his tenancy; the State sought review. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the court of appeals and reinstated the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Morgan) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Regina was the “owner” under Penal Code §1.07(a)(35) (i.e., had a greater right to possession) | Regina had greater right to possession because she alone held the lease, paid rent, and could revoke access; Penal Code definition governs, not pleading rules | Morgan was a cotenant with a possessory interest; Article 21.08 and tenancy principles mean he was an owner so entry was not by a non-owner | Regina was the “owner” because at the time of the offense she had a greater right to possession than Morgan; Penal Code definition controls; court of appeals reversed |
| Whether Morgan entered without the owner’s “effective consent” when Regina had temporarily locked him out during an argument | Owner’s testimony that she locked the deadbolt and did not want Morgan to enter is sufficient to show lack of effective consent at the time of entry | Morgan claims consent to live there had not been revoked and the lock was temporary, so entry was with effective consent | Regina’s contemporaneous testimony that she locked him out supports a rational jury finding there was no effective consent when Morgan kicked in the door |
Key Cases Cited
- Black v. State, 505 S.W.2d 821 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (ownership for burglary may be alleged as person with right to occupy even if title differs)
- Freeman v. State, 707 S.W.2d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (owner and possession rights measured at time of offense; greater right to possession governs)
- Alexander v. State, 753 S.W.2d 390 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (ownership proven by title, possession, or greater right to possession)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for legal sufficiency review: any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Ellett v. State, 607 S.W.2d 545 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (owner’s testimony that permission was not given can establish lack of effective consent)