Rickey Trent Stanley v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8041

Appellant Rickey Trent Stanley struck and killed Deputy Chad Key while driving westbound on a four-lane divided highway where officers had set up spikes and were diverting traffic into one lane; Key was directing traffic near stopped vehicles.
After the collision, Stanley did not stop immediately; he was stopped about a mile away. Field sobriety tests failed and his blood-alcohol concentration was 0.184.
A jury convicted Stanley of (1) felony murder (based on felony DWI as the underlying felony) and (2) aggravated assault with a deadly weapon causing serious bodily injury to a public servant; the jury assessed 99 years for murder and 42 years for aggravated assault (plus fines).
Stanley argued on appeal that (1) the aggravated-assault conviction violated the Double Jeopardy Clause (multiple punishments for the same conduct) and (2) evidence was legally insufficient to prove he committed an act clearly dangerous to human life for felony murder.
The court vacated the aggravated-assault conviction on double-jeopardy grounds but affirmed the felony-murder conviction, holding the evidence was sufficient to support that conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether conviction for aggravated assault plus felony murder violates Double Jeopardy	State: Statutes are different; Blockburger shows different elements so cumulative punishment permitted	Stanley: Though elements differ, the offenses as charged share focus, unit of prosecution, punishment range and culpable mental state such that the legislature intended only one punishment	Court: Vacated aggravated-assault conviction; offenses are the same for double-jeopardy purposes under the Ervin factors
Whether evidence is sufficient to support felony murder (act clearly dangerous to human life)	State: Evidence (eyewitness speed estimates, defendant’s admission, BAC, context of diverted traffic and emergency scene) supports that driving into the scene was an act clearly dangerous to human life	Stanley: Expert testimony and scene conditions (poor lighting, officer visibility, washed-out strobes) cast reasonable doubt; officer said defendant was in control when stopped	Court: Affirmed murder conviction; a rational jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt the act was clearly dangerous to human life (speed/conditions sufficient)

Shelby v. State, 448 S.W.3d 431 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (double-jeopardy framework and analysis of legislative intent)
Ex parte Benson, 459 S.W.3d 67 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (Blockburger and Ervin-factor guidance)
Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932) (same-elements test for multiple punishments)
Ex parte Ervin, 991 S.W.2d 804 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (nonexclusive factors to determine legislative intent on multiple punishments)
Parrish v. State, 869 S.W.2d 352 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (relevance of charging instrument in double-jeopardy analysis)
Bigon v. State, 252 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (focus of felony murder and unit-of-prosecution issues)
Lomax v. State, 233 S.W.3d 302 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (felony DWI may serve as underlying felony for felony murder)
Padilla v. State, 326 S.W.3d 195 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (jury may resolve conflicting expert/speed testimony)
Dobbs v. State, 434 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (standard for legal sufficiency review)
Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (hypothetically correct jury charge for sufficiency review)
Perez v. State, 11 S.W.3d 218 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (DWI does not require culpable mental state)
Garfias v. State, 424 S.W.3d 54 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (gravamen of aggravated assault is causing bodily injury)