Richard Andrews v. State
429 S.W.3d 849
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Andrews indicted for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon resulting in bodily injury for shooting Box.
- Indictment spelled victim as Boc; trial and voir dire used Box; a typographical variance appeared.
- Pretrial and trial evidence showed Andrews’ confrontation with Box/Barber and Box’s paraplegia from gunfire.
- Andrews sought cross-examination about Box’s civil suit against him and about Box’s parole status; trial court limited both.
- During punishment, extraneous bad acts were admitted with notice issues; idem sonans and FBI bulletin objections were raised but denied or resolved; the court ultimately affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cross-examining civil suit bias | Andrews should cross-examine Box about the civil suit | State properly excluded; limited cross-examination | Error, but harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Cross-examining parole status bias | Parole status is relevant to bias | Trial court properly limited to prevent collateral issues | Within discretion; no reversible error |
| Admission of extraneous bad acts in punishment | State failed to give proper notice identifying victims | Notice substantially complied; fair to admit | Notice substantially complied; admissible evidence permitted |
| Fatal variance between indictment and proof | Variance between Boc and Box prejudices defense | Typographical error; no material variance | No material variance; no prejudice to substantial rights |
| Idem sonans instruction | Should instruct jury on sound-alike names | No actual harm given indictment; Box/Boc sufficiently linked | No actual harm; instruction not required |
Key Cases Cited
- Sansom v. State, 292 S.W.3d 112 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (Abuse of discretion in limiting cross-examination; credibility factors)
- Carroll v. State, 916 S.W.2d 494 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (Broad scope of cross-examination to show bias; limitations permissible)
- Van Arsdall v. California, 475 U.S. 673 (1986) (Cross-examination limits; harmless-error standard)
- Cox v. State, 523 S.W.2d 695 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975) (Evidence of civil suits against defendant; bias impeachment)
- McNeal v. State, 600 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (Typographical error in name; no fatal variance)
- Abdnor v. State, 871 S.W.2d 726 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (Idem sonans—when to give jury instruction; harm analysis)
- Gollihar v. State, 46 S.W.3d 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (Variance analysis; substantial rights)
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984) (Harmless-error framework for trial errors)