Sanders, Justin
PD-1171-15
| Tex. | Oct 14, 2015Background
- Justin Sanders was tried for felony murder after a police officer, Officer William Jason Sprague, was struck and later died when vehicles fled a large disturbance at a public park; Sanders’ silver SUV was identified by some witnesses as the vehicle involved.
- Evidence linking Sanders’ vehicle to the collision was limited and witness accounts were inconsistent; physical damage to the SUV was minimal and no officer DNA or personal effects were found on the vehicle.
- During trial prosecutors wore “fallen officer” wristbands and, at one point, asked a witness a question implying threats had been made to witnesses; Sanders moved for mistrial on both grounds and the trial court denied both motions.
- Police seized Sanders’ cell phone without a warrant during an interrogation, later sought and obtained a warrant to search its contents, and introduced text messages recovered from the phone at trial; Sanders moved to suppress the phone evidence.
- Sanders was convicted by a jury of felony murder (alternative predicates: aggravated assault on a public servant or evading arrest/detention while using a vehicle) and sentenced to 30 years; the Sixth Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation of mistrial claims for wristbands and witness-threat question | Sanders: moving for mistrial without first requesting instruction to disregard preserves error under Young v. State | State: defendant failed to request instruction to disregard; thus error not preserved | Court of Appeals: error not preserved because no instruction to disregard was requested (trial court sustained objection but no request made); Young considered but did not control here |
| Legality of warrantless seizure and subsequent consent to search of cell phone | Sanders: phone was seized by order (not voluntarily), seizure unlawful, subsequent consent tainted by illegality; suppression required | State: consent attenuated from illegal seizure; exigent circumstances or eventual warrant/inevitable discovery justify admission | Court of Appeals: initial seizure unlawful but Brick attenuation factors supported admission—consent sufficiently attenuated; evidence admissible |
| Admission of text messages (extraneous-offense evidence) | Sanders: texts showing drug activity were extraneous and unfairly prejudicial under Rules 404(b)/403 | State: texts relevant to motive/intent to evade or avoid police; limiting instruction given | Court of Appeals: texts admissible for motive/intent after Montgomery balancing; limiting instruction provided |
| Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder based on evading arrest/detention | Sanders: insufficient evidence that he knew officer was attempting to arrest or detain him (an essential element of evading) | State: testimony and circumstantial evidence permit reasonable inference defendant committed felony evading while in vehicle | Court of Appeals: evidence sufficient in the light most favorable to verdict to support felony murder conviction based on evading in a vehicle |
Key Cases Cited
- Young v. State, 137 S.W.3d 65 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (preservation rule re: mistrial vs. request for instruction)
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (U.S. 2014) (recognizing heightened privacy interests in cell phones)
- Brick v. State, 738 S.W.2d 676 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) (factors for attenuation of taint from illegal seizure to subsequent consent)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1963) (fruit of the poisonous tree / attenuation analysis)
- Jackson v. State, 718 S.W.2d 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (defendant must know officer is attempting to arrest to be guilty of evading)
- Griego v. State, 345 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2011) (insufficient evidence where defendant likely did not know officers were attempting to detain)
- Redwine v. State, 305 S.W.3d 360 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (distinguishing evasion of officer from evasion of arrest)