Simon Rene Garcia v. State
486 S.W.3d 602
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- On March 26, 2012 Samuel Wass was shot and killed after an argument; Simon Rene Garcia (appellant) was driving a silver Toyota Tundra with an unidentified, heavier-set passenger who fired a .45 Glock.
- Multiple eyewitnesses placed Garcia as the driver, observed the passenger shoot Wass, and reported Garcia engaged in the verbal altercation and told the passenger to leave after the shooting.
- Witnesses also testified to a prior hostile history between Garcia and Wass, including threats and a prior alleged vehicle theft by Wass.
- Garcia was indicted for murder (charging him as a principal); the State’s trial theory throughout was liability under the Texas law of parties (that Garcia aided/encouraged the shooter).
- A jury convicted Garcia under the law of parties and sentenced him to 30 years’ confinement. Garcia appealed, challenging (1) sufficiency of the evidence and (2) the jury charge (inclusion/application of the law of parties).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Garcia) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by including the law of parties in the jury charge when the indictment did not allege it | Law of parties need not be pled; State relied on evidence supporting party liability | Inclusion impermissibly amended indictment and deprived notice | No error — Court of Criminal Appeals precedent permits party theory without explicit pleading (charge inclusion proper) |
| Whether the application paragraph failed to tie each alternate murder theory to a separate parties instruction (jury unanimity error) | Alternate means/manners can be submitted together; jury must only unanimously agree defendant caused the death | Failure to join each murder paragraph with a separate parties instruction deprived unanimity and created reversible harm | No reversible error — jury need only unanimously agree defendant acted as a party causing death; alternate means need not be unanimously agreed upon |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to convict Garcia as the shooter (principal) | State did not assert Garcia was the shooter; evidence focused on party liability | Garcia argued evidence insufficient to show he was the shooter | Not at issue—the court observed State never argued Garcia was the shooter and rejected this claim |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to convict Garcia under the law of parties | Cumulative eyewitness testimony, prior threats, Garcia’s conduct before/during/after (driving, starting argument, directing leave) support inference he solicited/encouraged/assisted the shooter | Evidence insufficient; relies on Gross to argue convictions cannot rest on speculation and mere presence | Evidence sufficient — jury could reasonably infer common design/intent and Garcia’s assistance to the shooter; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Marable v. State, 85 S.W.3d 287 (Tex. Crim. App.) (law of parties need not be pled in indictment)
- Landrian v. State, 268 S.W.3d 532 (Tex. Crim. App.) (jury need not be unanimous on alternate means/manners of committing same offense)
- Ngo v. State, 175 S.W.3d 738 (Tex. Crim. App.) (standards for reviewing jury-charge error; unanimity principles)
- Gross v. State, 380 S.W.3d 181 (Tex. Crim. App.) (reversing party conviction where conviction rested on speculation and insufficient evidence of common design)
- Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App.) (harm analysis for unobjected-to jury-charge error)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App.) (deference to jury on witness credibility and sufficiency review)