Wortham v. State
366 S.W.3d 871
Tex. App.2012Background
- Wortham was convicted of injury to a child and sentenced to 40 years in prison.
- C.B., a two-year-old, suffered a severe brain injury with subdural hematoma and seizures requiring an endotracheal tube.
- Medical testimony indicated the injuries were nonaccidental and consistent with nonaccidental head trauma or shaken baby syndrome.
- Wortham reportedly claimed the child was sleeping and then he found her with a bag on her face; he attempted to revive her after removing the bag.
- Doctors testified that a bag on the face would not explain the brain injuries, and the record supported a finding of nonaccidental trauma.
- Indictment alleged Wortham intentionally or knowingly caused serious bodily injury by shaking and restricting airflow; suffocation theory was disputed by medical experts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to support injury to a child | Wortham | State | Evidence sufficient; conviction affirmed |
| Denial of lesser-included-offense instructions | Wortham | State | No reversible error; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (legal-sufficiency standard for criminal offenses)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (deference to jury on conflicts; weigh/evaluate evidence)
- Sweed v. State, 351 S.W.3d 63 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (two-step test for lesser-included offenses; any evidence suffices)
- Goad v. State, 354 S.W.3d 443 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (evidence must raise valid lesser-included offense; jury instruction proper if so)
- Thompson v. State, 227 S.W.3d 153 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (lesser-included-offense instruction not warranted when conduct differs from charged offense)
- Irving v. State, 176 S.W.3d 842 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (definition of lesser-included offenses; conduct alignment with proof)
- Saunders v. State, 913 S.W.2d 564 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (harm in denying proper lesser-included instructions when evidence supports them)
- Arevalo v. State, 943 S.W.2d 887 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (avoid inviting irrational verdicts with improper lesser charges)
- Bignall v. State, 887 S.W.2d 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (standard for entitlement to lesser charges: anything more than a scintilla)
- Segundo v. State, 270 S.W.3d 79 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (lesser offense as valid rational alternative to charged offense)
- Gay v. State, 235 S.W.3d 829 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007) (evidence supporting lesser offense if reasonably interpretable)
- Robalin v. State, 224 S.W.3d 470 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007) (harm analysis when determining lesser-included instructions)