Raymond Merril Jessop v. State
368 S.W.3d 653
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Appellant Raymond Merrill Jessop and nine other FLDS members lived at the YFZ Ranch in Schleicher County, Texas, and were indicted for sexual assault of a child.
- Appellant was convicted by a jury and sentenced to ten years’ confinement plus an $8,000 fine.
- The State presented circumstantial and DNA evidence linking Jessop to paternity of J. Jessop's child, born in 2005 when she was 16.
- J. Jessop and Jessop were sealed in a celestial marriage at age 15 and lived together in the YFZ Ranch household.
- DNA testing showed Jessop’s DNA matched the child’s DNA at 15 loci, with very high paternity probabilities; a 0.5 prior probability was used in the analysis.
- Jessop challenged multiple evidentiary rulings on appeal, including sufficiency of evidence, DNA methodology, church records, and punishment-phase evidence; the court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for penetration | Jessop argues the State failed to prove penetration or that acts occurred in Texas. | State contends circumstantial evidence, including celestial marriage and birth, proves penetration and Texas location. | Evidence legally sufficient to prove penetration. |
| Territorial jurisdiction | State must prove acts occurred in Texas beyond reasonable doubt or by preponderance; relies on Texas-based conduct. | Evidence shows sexual relationship occurred at YFZ Ranch in Texas, establishing jurisdiction. | Texas has territorial jurisdiction; evidence sufficient beyond reasonable doubt. |
| DNA paternity evidence admissibility and 0.5 prior probability | DNA paternity statistics, including the 0.5 prior probability, are valid and probative. | 0.5 prior probability invades presumption of innocence and other statistical concerns render it unreliable. | DNA paternity evidence admitted; the 0.5 prior probability is permissible and reliable under Kentucky/Griffith framework; no due-process violation. |
| Admission of church records (Rule 901; hearsay; Confrontation; due process) | Records of religious organization and family records are admissible hearsay exceptions; probative to character and background. | Challenging authentication, hearsay, confrontation, and due process implications of the records. | Court overruled objections; records properly admitted under hearsay exceptions; no Confrontation or due process violation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 S. Ct. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard: rational juror could have found elements beyond reasonable doubt)
- Byrd v. State, 336 S.W.3d 242 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (sufficiency review and standard for element proof)
- Geesa v. State, 820 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (circumstantial-evidence standard abolishing need to negate all alternate hypotheses)
- Villarreal v. State, 267 S.W.3d 85 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2008) (circumstantial evidence and inferences in penetration cases)
- Griffith v. State, 976 S.W.2d 241 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1998) (0.5 prior probability in DNA paternity testing not a violation of presumption of innocence)
- Beasley v. State, 902 S.W.2d 452 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (admissibility and relevance of character evidence at punishment)
- Nenno v. State, 970 S.W.2d 549 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (framework for reliability of expert testimony in soft sciences)
- Kelly v. State, 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (Kelly test for reliability of expert testimony)