351 S.W.3d 913
Tex. App.2011Background
- Ramos was convicted of criminally negligent homicide and three counts of tampering with evidence related to Maria Gallegos's death.
- The State alleged Ramos altered, destroyed, or concealed the corpse to impair its verity or availability as evidence.
- Ramos appealed challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for tampering by alteration of the body.
- Ramos also challenged the use of two California convictions to enhance his punishment, arguing they were not final in Texas.
- The record included evidence Ramos dragged the body, altering its position and appearance, and caused the torso to be exposed.
- The appellate court reviewed whether alteration can be proven by physical manipulation of evidence and whether California finality supports enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alteration of the body evidence | Ramos | Ramos | Evidence sufficient to prove alteration |
| Use of California convictions for enhancement | Ramos | State | California convictions final for enhancement;可 |
Key Cases Cited
- King's Court Racquetball v. Dawkins, 62 S.W.3d 229 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 2001) (interprets 'alter' as to change or make different; includes physical manipulation of evidence)
- Rotenberry v. State, 245 S.W.3d 583 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2007) (alteration involves acts that physically manipulate the evidence)
- People v. Laino, 32 Cal.4th 878 (Cal. 2004) (probationary finality for California convictions matters for enhancements)
- Dunn v. State, 2006 Tex.App. LEXIS 7425 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2006) (use of foreign finality rules for enhancement (not designated for publication))
- Skillern v. State, 890 S.W.2d 849 (Tex. App.-Austin 1994) (foreign probated convictions can enhance if final in originating jurisdiction)
- Dominique v. State, 787 S.W.2d 107 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1990) (same principle for probated convictions from other jurisdictions)