Sendejo, David
PD-0935-15
| Tex. App. | Sep 16, 2015Background
- Two indictments for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, joined for trial, in Harris County (trial court Nos. 1408625 & 1408626).
- Convictions entered on both counts with enhanced penalty; automatic 65-year terms to run concurrently.
- Witnesses Aaron and Angel Franco testified that a gunshot occurred immediately after Aaron closed the door on Sendejo, who was alone at the door each time.
- No witness identified Sendejo as the shooter and no gun was found; the shooting occurred through a solid door, complicating identity proof.
- Police identified Sendejo by photo arrays rather than multiple identifications; defense argued a nearby blue-house suspect could be the shooter.
- Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgments, addressing sufficiency of evidence and a motion-in-limine mistrial issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there legally sufficient evidence proving identity beyond a reasonable doubt? | Sendejo identity not proven; shooter not identified in court; bullets fired through door; no gun seen. | Identity not proven; absence of direct gun evidence undermines guilt. | Evidence sufficient; rational jury could convict on circumstantial/indirect proof. |
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying a mistrial after a limine violation? | Angel Franco’s statement that Sendejo was seen with a gun violated limine and harmed defendant. | Trial court promptly instructed to disregard; error, if any, was curable; not extreme. | No abuse of discretion; instruction to disregard cured potential prejudice; strong remaining evidence of guilt. |
Key Cases Cited
- Archie v. State, 221 S.W.3d 695 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007) (standard for reviewing denial of mistrial on abuse of discretion; prejudice must be incurable)
- Temple v. State, 390 S.W.3d 341 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013) (circumstantial evidence admissible; identity proven by totality of evidence)
- Wead v. State, 120 S.W.3d 126 (Tex.Crim.App. 2004) (abuse of discretion review; zone of reasonable disagreement)
- Ladd v. State, 3 S.W.3d 547 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) (prejudice and curative measures factor in mistrial analysis)
- Kemp v. State, 846 S.W.2d 289 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992) (curative instructions for extraneous evidence can render error harmless)