Pawlak v. State
2013 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1322
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2013Background
- Paul Pawlak was convicted of multiple sexual-assault offenses (including sexual assault of a child) and sentenced to 55 years.
- Prosecutors introduced two discs seized from Pawlak’s home containing approximately 9,900 pornographic images (mostly male/gay porn; some images of child pornography). All images were admitted into evidence; two were published to the jury.
- Pawlak objected under Texas Rule of Evidence 403 that the sheer volume and inflammatory nature of the images made them unfairly prejudicial; the State argued they rebutted Pawlak’s claim he was not sexually interested in men or boys.
- The court allowed admission; the jury requested “all of the evidence” during deliberations and the trial court sent the exhibits to the jury.
- The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, reasoning Pawlak had opened the door and that the evidence was not unduly prejudicial under the Davis balancing approach.
- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed, holding the trial court abused its discretion by admitting all 9,900 images and remanded for a harm analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Pawlak opened the door to extraneous-offense evidence | Pawlak contended the State should not be allowed broad extraneous evidence; he preserved Rule 403 objection | State argued Pawlak’s defenses (denying sexual interest in males) opened the door to rebuttal via possession evidence | Court did not reach this issue after resolving Rule 403 claim (granted relief on 403) |
| Whether admission of ~9,900 pornographic images was an abuse of discretion under Tex. R. Evid. 403 | Admission was unfairly prejudicial due to sheer volume and inflammatory content involving children and homosexual imagery | Admission was permissible rebuttal and not unduly prejudicial; Davis factors supported admission | Court held the trial court abused its discretion by admitting all 9,900 images without limiting quantity or source |
| Probative value of images to prove charged assaults | Pawlak argued possession evidence was only marginally probative of the assaults | State argued images rebutted defense that Pawlak lacked sexual interest in males/boys | Court: images were only marginally probative relative to direct victim testimony; not sufficient to justify volume admitted |
| Whether volume of character/extraneous evidence can become unfairly prejudicial | Pawlak argued sheer volume can convert admissible evidence into unfair prejudice | State argued prejudice was not unfair and evidence was relevant rebuttal | Court confirmed precedent that volume can make evidence unfairly prejudicial and found that occurred here |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. State, 313 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (factors for weighing highly probative but inflammatory exhibits)
- Fuller v. State, 363 S.W.3d 583 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (harm-analysis remand procedure)
- Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (Rule 403: distinction between prejudice and unfair prejudice; sexually related misconduct is inherently inflammatory)
- Wheeler v. State, 67 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (assessing need for extraneous evidence in he-said-she-said contexts)
- Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (volume of character evidence can become unfairly prejudicial)
- Salazar v. State, 90 S.W.3d 330 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (discussing cumulative and prejudicial effect of character evidence)