Sanchez v. State
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1670
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2011Background
- Sanchez was indicted on multiple counts of indecency with a child and aggravated sexual assault of his step-daughter, RF.
- The State designated Guzman as the outcry witness but later substituted Newsome after discovering Guzman was not the first to whom RF spoke.
- A pre-trial Article 38.072 hearing was held to assess the reliability of RF's outcry statements; cross-examination focused on time, content, and circumstances.
- Newsome testified at the pre-trial hearing; RF’s statements were later presented at trial via Guzman’s notes and Newsome’s prior testimony.
- RF testified at trial, detailing ongoing sexual abuse by Sanchez; other witnesses corroborated parts of RF’s account, and defense pressed recantation theories.
- The Fourth Court of Appeals affirmed admissibility, holding Newsome’s pre-trial testimony admissible; the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted review to address the cross-examination issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Article 38.072 hearings provide adequate cross-examination. | State: pre-trial cross-examination serves to test reliability; similar motive exists for trial cross-examination. | Sanchez: pre-trial cross-examination is too narrow to test credibility; not adequate for trial admissibility. | No; Article 38.072 cross-examination is inadequate to admit unavailable witness testimony at trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanchez v. State, 335 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2010) (discusses Article 38.072 scope and cross-examination)
- Buckley v. State, 786 S.W.2d 357 (Tex.Cr.App.1990) (outcry testimony and confrontation considerations)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. Supreme Court 2004) (foundation for confrontation with testimonial statements)
- Coronado v. State, 351 S.W.3d 315 (Tex.Cr.App.2011) (treats hearsay and confrontation considerations)
- Holland v. State, 770 S.W.2d 56 (Tex.App.-Austin 1989) (Article 38.072 scope and reliability focus)
- Broderick v. State, 89 S.W.3d 696 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002) (limitations of article 38.072 scope)
- Russell v. State, 604 S.W.2d 914 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980) (examining trial cross-examination breadth and limits)