Sergio Martinez Junior v. the State of Texas
14-20-00136-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 14, 2021Background
- Martinez lived in a house with two roommates; a midnight dispute arose after Martinez accused roommate Elber of urinating in the kitchen sink.
- Martinez retrieved a gun, pointed it at Elber (and at Ariel), and threatened to shoot; Elber was leaving with a laundry basket when Martinez shot him twice (back, then face).
- Officers arrived after reports of gunshots; Martinez approached them, admitted “I shot him,” and told them the gun was in a bowl inside the house; Elber survived with serious injuries.
- Martinez claimed he armed himself because Elber was often violent and carried a knife, and testified he flinched/closed his eyes and did not aim when he fired (claiming self-defense/mistake).
- Martinez was convicted of aggravated assault of a household member causing serious bodily injury with a deadly weapon and appealed raising five issues; the State’s cross‑appeal was filed but not addressed.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Martinez's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency—intent to cause serious bodily injury | Evidence (shooting twice at close range, threats, use of deadly weapon, admissions) supports intent | Martinez contends he lacked intent because he feared being stabbed and thought Elber had a knife | Overruled—evidence legally sufficient to infer intent |
| Sufficiency—self‑defense | Jury reasonably rejected self‑defense based on witness testimony, bullet locations, Martinez’s admission | Martinez argues he reasonably believed Elber was dangerous/unarmed evidence was disputed | Overruled—record permits rational factfinder to reject self‑defense |
| Ineffective assistance—failure to request mistake‑of‑fact instruction | No record showing counsel’s strategy or that Martinez would have been entitled to instruction; no motion for new trial | Martinez says counsel was ineffective for not requesting mistake‑of‑fact instruction | Overruled—record insufficient to prove deficient performance or entitlement to instruction |
| Evidentiary ruling—admission of post‑surgery photos (Rule 403) | Photographs probative of severity and causation of serious injury; not cumulative | Martinez argues photos were gruesome and unfairly prejudicial | Overruled—trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting photos |
| Jury charge—inclusion of recklessness as lesser included offense | Reckless aggravated assault is a proper lesser‑included offense when supported by evidence | Martinez argues including recklessness expands indictment and violates Reed | Overruled—court properly submitted reckless aggravated assault as a standalone lesser‑included instruction (distinguishing Reed) |
| State cross‑appeal—apparent‑danger instruction | State sought review of inclusion of an "apparent danger" instruction | N/A (cross‑appeal) | Not addressed—appellate court declined to reach State's cross‑appeal because affirmance gives State no practical relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (establishes constitutional standard for sufficiency review)
- Gear v. State, 340 S.W.3d 743 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (application of Jackson sufficiency standard in Texas)
- Zuniga v. State, 551 S.W.3d 729 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018) (hypothetically correct jury charge governs sufficiency analysis)
- Forest v. State, 989 S.W.2d 365 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (firing a gun toward a person evidences dangerousness and supports intent)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong ineffective‑assistance standard)
- Reed v. State, 117 S.W.3d 260 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (error to include lower culpable mental state in a single application paragraph when not alleged in indictment)
- Hicks v. State, 372 S.W.3d 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (distinguishes Reed; reckless aggravated assault may be submitted as a lesser included offense when evidence supports it)
- Gigliobianco v. State, 210 S.W.3d 637 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (framework for Rule 403 balancing of probative value vs. unfair prejudice)
- Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (defines “unfair prejudice” for Rule 403 analysis)
- Darkins v. State, 430 S.W.3d 559 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014) (intent may be inferred from use of deadly weapon and surrounding conduct)