Wilson Sieh Tarley v. State
420 S.W.3d 204
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- In Feb. 2011, police encountered Gentles who reported Tarley had choked and beaten her; information filed against Tarley.
- In Mar. 2011, a DA rep asked Gentles to testify; Tarley overheard and tried to influence her to deny the assault.
- Tarley confined Gentles to the apartment and assaulted her again; Gentles eventually escaped to a hospital.
- Police testimony described Gentles as crying, frightened, and injured; she moved to a hotel with police shortly after.
- Gentles later left for Florida without providing a forwarding address, making contact information unavailable.
- Tarley challenged the admission of Gentles’ out-of-court statements from police under the Confrontation Clause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confrontation Clause applicability | Tarley argues Gentles’ statements were inadmissible. | State contends forfeiture by wrongdoing applies due to Tarley’s actions. | Forfeiture by wrongdoing permits admission. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez v. State, 195 S.W.3d 114 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause considerations)
- Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (2008) (domestic-violence context and forfeiture rationale)
- Sohail v. State, 264 S.W.3d 251 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2008) (inference of causation for unavailability supported by evidence)
- Osbourn v. State, 92 S.W.3d 531 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- De La Paz v. State, 279 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (approval of admissible evidence under applicable law)
- Martinez v. State, 327 S.W.3d 727 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- Taylor v. State, 268 S.W.3d 571 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (reaffirmation of abuse-of-discretion review and permissible theories)