REZA v. State
2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 2006
Tex. App.2011Background
- Mohammed Reza appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child.
- The victim, A.H., was eight when the assaults began; Reza, her uncle by marriage, interacted with her at his Texas household.
- The assaults occurred repeatedly from ages eight to about Thanksgiving 2006, including touching her inappropriately and using cream on fingers.
- In 2006, A.H.’s family moved to Texas and lived with Reza and Daisy; the assaults continued during this period.
- The State charged two counts: digital penetration (Jan 6, 2006) and contact with A.H.’s sexual organ (Nov 23, 2006); Reza was convicted on count one and acquitted on count two.
- Reza moved for election of the specific acts the State relied on; the trial court and State complied; conviction remains, and the defense challenge on the jury charge followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State’s election was sufficient after defense request | Reza argues the court failed to require a proper election. | State argues its election was adequate and properly informed the court. | Election adequate; conviction upheld. |
| Whether failure to instruct on the election in the jury charge was harmful | Reza contends jury was misled and verdict could be nonunanimous. | State concedes charge error but argues no substantial harm. | Error not egregiously harmful; jury charge error deemed harmless; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- O'Neal v. State, 746 S.W.2d 769 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (Election requirement; discretionary pre-rest vs post-rest election)
- Phillips v. State, 193 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (Constitutional harm when no election after timely request)
- Dixon v. State, 201 S.W.3d 731 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (Four purposes of election rule; harm analysis framework)
- Isenhower v. State, 261 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (Election-charge and trial court instruction; impact on harm analysis)
- Duffey v. State, 326 S.W.3d 627 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009) (Charge-error analysis; election-related harm framework)
- Hulsey v. State, 211 S.W.3d 853 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006) (Election-related harm considerations)
- Farr v. State, 140 S.W.3d 895 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004) (Election issues in multiple incidents)