409 S.W.3d 11
Tex. App.2013Background
- Whitfield was convicted of rape in 1981 and received a 15-year sentence.
- In 2007, Whitfield sought post-conviction DNA testing under Chapter 64; evidence kit from original offense had been destroyed in 1997, but some hairs remained.
- In 2009, testing by a DPS forensic scientist yielded a partial profile from a hair on the complainant’s shirt that matched the complainant’s DNA; other hairs were inconclusive.
- The trial court found the DNA results did not exonerate Whitfield and that the results were not reasonably probable to have changed the outcome at trial.
- Whitfield appealed, challenging the trial court’s unfavorable 64.04 finding; the majority in Holloway held appellate review of such findings is limited, and the current decision dismisses Whitfield’s direct appeal.
- The dissent argues the appellate court has jurisdiction to review the sufficiency of the evidence supporting an unfavorable 64.04 finding and would affirm on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to review 64.04 finding on appeal | Whitfield; request direct review of sufficiency of evidence supporting 64.04 finding | Whitfield; Holloway bars review of sufficiency of 64.04 finding on appeal | Appellate review of 64.04 sufficiency is within jurisdiction |
| Effect of Holloway on review of unfavorable findings | Holloway limits only favorable findings; permits review of unfavorable findings | Holloway barred appellate review of both favorable and unfavorable 64.04 findings | Holloway does not bar review of unfavorable findings on direct appeal |
| Sufficiency of evidence supporting unfavorable 64.04 finding | Record shows sufficient evidence to support unfavorable finding | Evidence insufficient to show reasonable probability of innocence | Record supports unfavorable finding; no reasonable probability Whitfield would be acquitted |
| Relation between 64.05 appeal rights and review of 64.04 findings | 64.05 authorizes direct appeal in the same manner as other criminal matters | 64.05 does not authorize direct review of 64.04 sufficiency under Holloway | 64.05 permits direct appeal of 64.04 findings; review should occur on direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Holloway, 360 S.W.3d 480 (Tex.Crim.App.2012) (limits appellate review of 64.04 findings, allowing remedy via habeas corpus)
- Wolfe v. State, 120 S.W.3d 368 (Tex.Crim.App.2003) (recognizes appeal of unfavorable DNA test results finding)
- Frank v. State, 190 S.W.3d 136 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005) (review of unfavorable DNA test results on appeal)
- Johnson v. State, 183 S.W.3d 515 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2006) (review of unfavorable DNA test results on appeal)
- Booker v. State, 155 S.W.3d 259 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2004) (reviewing unfavorable DNA test results on appeal)
- Rivera v. State, 89 S.W.3d 55 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (burden to show reasonable probability of innocence in 64.04 context)
- Cate v. State, 326 S.W.3d 388 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2010) (inconclusive DNA results do not establish innocence or guilt)
- Gutierrez (Ex parte Gutierrez), 337 S.W.3d 883 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (test results must meaningfully undermine confidence in conviction)
- Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (definition of reasonable probability in DNA testing context)
- Kutzner v. State, 75 S.W.3d 427 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (probative value of DNA evidence in dispositive determination)
- Armstrong v. State, 805 S.W.2d 791 (Tex.Crim.App.1991) (concept of advisory opinions and jurisdiction)
- Ex parte Ruiz, 750 S.W.2d 217 (Tex.Crim.App.1988) (jurisdictional considerations for post-conviction relief)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court 1981) (standard for sufficiency of evidence review)