Rafael Reyes v. State
465 S.W.3d 801
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- Appellant Rafael Reyes was indicted and convicted for evading arrest or detention while using a vehicle (enhanced to a third-degree felony). Jury assessed 3 years confinement and a $3,000 fine.
- Officer Randy Guerra responded to a report that Reyes had taken his girlfriend Dora Franco’s car without consent, located Reyes driving the car, then activated emergency lights and siren and followed him for approximately four to five blocks.
- Guerra testified Reyes accelerated when lights were activated, ran a stop sign, fishtailed, and then parked at Franco’s residence; Reyes exited, raised his hands, and was detained after being ordered to get on the ground.
- Defense witnesses disputed aspects of Guerra’s account (e.g., one witness said no siren and that Reyes did not appear to be fleeing); another witness testified the officer was untruthful.
- Reyes raised four appellate issues: (1) sufficiency of the evidence, (2) trial court’s denial of a hearing on his motion for new trial based on GPS evidence, (3) claim that the 2011 amendment to Tex. Penal Code § 38.04 violated the Texas Constitution’s single-subject requirement, and (4) that conflicting amendments and the rule of lenity required a lesser punishment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence | Reyes: pursuit too brief, inconsistencies, officer testimony that lights/siren might not be seen/heard — insufficient to prove he knew officer was attempting to detain him | State: Officer followed closely with lights/siren, Reyes accelerated and ran traffic device, exited with hands up — supports intentional flight | Affirmed conviction; evidence sufficient for evading in vehicle |
| Motion for new trial hearing | Reyes: new GPS data from patrol vehicle warranted a hearing | State: GPS would be cumulative/impeaching; officer and eyewitness testimony already fix location | Denial of hearing not an abuse of discretion; GPS was cumulative |
| Single-subject challenge to § 38.04 | Reyes: 2011 Senate Bill 1416 amending § 38.04 violated Texas Const. art. III § 35, so sentencing as third-degree felony unauthorized | State: Court of Criminal Appeals held SB1416 constitutional; offense properly punished as third-degree felony | Rejected; SB1416 complies with single-subject requirement; sentence authorized |
| Conflicting amendments / rule of lenity | Reyes: conflict between SB1416 and HB3423 and lenity require treating offense as state-jail felony | State: No reduction in punishment; apply Gov’t Code §311.025(b); statute not ambiguous so lenity inapplicable | Rejected; no ambiguity and third-degree felony punishment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (deference to jury on credibility and legal sufficiency review)
- Ex parte Jones, 440 S.W.3d 628 (Court of Criminal Appeals: SB1416 constitutional; evading in vehicle punishable as third-degree felony)
- Griego v. State, 345 S.W.3d 742 (distinguishable insufficiency holding where officer not visible/known to appellant)
- Redwine v. State, 305 S.W.3d 360 (distinguishable insufficiency holding where lights were activated after appellant exited vehicle)