William Collins v. State
07-15-00180-CR
| Tex. App. | Apr 26, 2017Background
- Appellant William Collins was convicted by jury of aggravated assault in retaliation and sentenced to 99 years’ imprisonment following enhancement convictions.
- Victim Olda Dean Lewis identified a robber of Juan Bazaldua by the nickname “Honey” and reported to 911 that the assailant wore red; police linked that moniker to Collins.
- Collins spoke to police days later, admitting he was in the area and giving varying descriptions; police told him witnesses believed he was the robber.
- Later the same day as an in-person police interview, Collins attacked Lewis on a street video: knocking him down and kicking him multiple times; Lewis required hospitalization for several days.
- Collins admitted to striking/kicking Lewis but later claimed the assault stemmed from personal matters between them (a dispute over a woman).
- The jury found Collins guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (his foot) and of committing the assault in retaliation for Lewis’s identification to police.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency to prove retaliation (knowledge that Lewis identified him) | State: evidence shows Lewis named "Honey," police linked nickname to Collins, police told Collins witnesses thought he was robber, attack followed those interactions — jury could infer retaliation | Collins: insufficient evidence he knew Lewis reported him or that the assault was retaliatory | Affirmed — evidence permitted a rational jury to find Collins knew Lewis had identified him and acted in retaliation |
| Foot as a "deadly weapon" | State: manner of use (kicking victim in head/face, causing severe injuries and hospitalization) made the foot capable of causing serious bodily injury | Collins: foot not a deadly weapon as a matter of law | Affirmed — evidence (laceration, dental/ maxillary injuries, blood, ICU stay, protracted impairment) supported finding the foot was capable of causing serious bodily injury |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (standard for sufficiency review and viewing evidence in light most favorable to the verdict)
- Swearingen v. State, 101 S.W.3d 89 (Jackson sufficiency principles and due process standard)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (constitutional standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234 (use of the hypothetically correct jury charge to measure sufficiency)
- Hill v. State, 913 S.W.2d 581 (definition of deadly weapon by manner of use)
- McCain v. State, 22 S.W.3d 497 (State need only prove weapon was capable of causing serious bodily injury in manner of use)
- Lane v. State, 151 S.W.3d 188 (a hand or foot may be a deadly weapon depending on evidence)
- Tucker v. State, 274 S.W.3d 688 (injuries can support inference weapon was capable of causing serious bodily injury)
- Lenzy v. State, 689 S.W.2d 305 (definition of bodily member; injuries to teeth can constitute serious bodily injury)