No. 05-06-00491-CR
Opinion Filed March 20, 2007. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.
On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F05-51489-SW.
Before Justices MOSELEY, BRIDGES, and RICHTER.
JIM MOSELEY, JUSTICE.
A jury convicted Leonard Dewayne Holmes of murder and assessed punishment at life imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. In two points of error, appellant contends the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the conviction. We affirm.
Background
On April 12, 2005, Rachel Garcia was shot twice while inside a room at the Sunset Motel. Police officers who were in the area arrived at the scene a few minutes after the shooting. Officer Gregory Rodriguez testified he saw several people standing near a breezeway at the motel. He heard a woman say, "[h]e has a gun." Rodriguez saw appellant standing outside room 12. Appellant was naked, had blood all over his body, and held a gun in his left hand. The door to room 12 was open. Rodriguez ordered appellant to drop the gun and get on the ground. Appellant walked inside room 12, stayed about ten seconds, then came back outside, put the gun on the ground, then laid down on the ground. Rodriguez entered room 12 while other officers handcuffed appellant. Rodriguez testified he saw Garcia laying face up on the bed. She was wearing only panties and had blood over most of her body. There was blood on the bed, walls, and front door, and torn clothing on the floor. Rodriguez heard appellant say, "[s]he shot herself, she shot herself." Paramedics arrived within two minutes after Rodriguez entered the room. Garcia was conscious but could only make "gurgling" sounds. Paramedics transported Garcia to a hospital, where she later died. Police officers retrieved the gun, a .380-caliber Lorcin automatic pistol. The ammunition clip was sticking slightly out of the gun, but the gun was loaded with one bullet in the chamber and three in the clip. Dr. Joni McClain, deputy chief medical examiner, performed an autopsy on Garcia and noted a bullet wound to Garcia's right upper chest and a graze wound to her left forearm. McClain testified a bullet passed through Garcia's chest and exited at the back of her right arm, traveling front-to-back and slightly downward. The bullet in the graze wound traveled left-to-right and slightly upward. There was no gunpowder residue or abrasions in or around either wound. McClain also noted multiple contusions and bruises on Garcia's arms, back, buttock area, and the back of both legs. These injuries appeared to be recent, as was a laceration above Garcia's left eyebrow. Toxicology tests showed Garcia had marijuana and cocaine in her blood, but no alcohol. McClain testified she did not believe Garcia's wounds resulted from either suicide or accident because of the trajectory of the bullets and neither was a contact wound. McClain testified that because the distance from Garcia's right armpit to her index finger was only twenty-five inches, a gunshot at that distance would leave residue in or around the wound, and that whoever shot Garcia stood approximately three feet from her at the time the gun discharged. Vicki Hall, a trace evidence examiner at the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences (SWIFS), analyzed residue kits from Garcia and appellant to check for gunshot residue on the backs of their hands. The tests showed no residue on Garcia's hands, but appellant had gunshot residue on both hands. David Spence, a supervisor at SWIFS, testified as an expert on gun muzzle distance. According to Spence, stippling is an abrasion of the skin caused by the gunpowder in a close-range gunshot. The further away from the target the gun is, the less gunpowder residue there is around the wound. Spence tested the gun used in the shooting of Garcia. At a distance of two feet, the gun deposited a "significant amount" of residue on the surface of a target, and at a distance of four feet, the gun deposited only a "few flakes" of gunpowder residue. Several people at the Sunset Motel testified about hearing a disturbance and gunshots. Gwendolyn Grant testified she was staying in room 13. She did not know who lived in room 12. On the evening of April 12, 2005, Grant heard a man and a woman fighting in the room next door. The fight lasted for about fifteen minutes. Grant heard sounds of "a fist hitting against skin" and "a woman hitting the walls." Grant heard the woman say, "[p]lease don't shoot me," then the woman yelled, "I want my mama, I want my mama." The man told the woman to get on her knees. The woman begged for her life. After Grant heard the man order the woman on her knees, Grant heard a gunshot. After hiding under the bathroom sink in her room for two minutes, Grant looked out the front window and saw a man shoot a gun up in the air. The man began yelling, "[s]omebody call the police, she shot herself, she shot herself." The man went back inside room 12, leaving the door open. Grant heard the man say, "[p]lease don't die on me. Stay awake, stay awake." James Hill and Lillian Finley had been staying in room 11 at the motel for five days before the shooting. Both Hill and Finley knew appellant and Garcia lived in room 12. Hill and Finley testified that before the shooting, they heard a fight in room 12 between appellant and Garcia. Hill heard appellant say, "I'mo bust your head to the white meat," and heard appellant order Garcia to take off her clothes. Finley heard appellant say, "[b]itch, you gonna get buried tonight." Both Hill and Finley testified they heard Garcia crying, screaming, and being pushed against the walls. Hill testified the fight lasted forty-five minutes, then he heard a gunshot. After the gunshot, Hill heard a door open and close. About fifteen seconds later, Hill heard a second gunshot. Finley testified the fight lasted about one hour. Finley heard a door open, a gunshot, and a door close. About one minute later, Finley heard a second gunshot. Hill and Finley grabbed their infant son and ran from the room toward a breezeway. They saw appellant outside room 12. Appellant was naked, covered in blood, and yelling for someone to call the police because "she shot herself." Detective Mark Ahearn testified appellant gave him three different versions of the shooting. Appellant initially told Ahearn that Garcia committed suicide by shooting herself. Appellant claimed he was walking out of the motel room and he heard the gunshot. When Ahearn told appellant he did not believe Garcia shot herself, appellant gave a different account of the events. Appellant said he and Garcia struggled over the gun, somehow the gun got "twisted back" towards Garcia, and the gun fired. Appellant demonstrated to Ahearn how the gun was a few inches from Garcia's chest when it accidentally discharged. After Ahearn told appellant Garcia had been shot twice, appellant said that after the gun discharged, he pressed the release button and dropped the ammunition clip on the bed, then threw the gun outside and it discharged a second time. Appellant testified he did not intentionally or knowingly shoot Garcia. Appellant testified he and Garcia had lived in room 11 for about six months prior to the shooting. They had known each other for over seven years. Neither appellant nor Garcia had jobs; they sold drugs from the hotel room to "make money." On April 12, 2005, appellant had been sleeping all day. After "hanging out" with a truck driver in another room at the motel, Garcia came back to room 11. She accused appellant of having another woman in the room while she had been gone because appellant was still in bed naked. Appellant and Garcia argued, cursed, and hit each other. Appellant told Garcia to leave, but she refused. Appellant decided to leave. As he went to the bathroom to get his clothes, appellant heard a "click, click" sound. He turned around and saw Garcia pointing a gun at him. Garcia was "crying and shaking," and appellant thought she would shoot him. Appellant walked toward Garcia and tried to grab the gun. They wrestled for the gun and "it went off." When appellant heard the gunshot, he looked around the room and went outside to see where the bullet had landed. He did not realized Garcia was shot until he came back inside the room and heard her say, "[b]aby, it hurt." Appellant ran outside and yelled for someone to help him because the telephone in the room would not access 911. Appellant testified he tossed the gun outside and it discharged a second time. Appellant testified he told everyone Garcia shot herself because that is what she said to him as she lay bleeding on the bed and he was only repeating what Garcia said. During cross-examination, appellant testified he initially told the police Garcia had shot herself as he was walking away from the bed. Appellant said he had his back toward Garcia when he heard the gunshot. Appellant testified that after a detective told him Garcia had died at the hospital, appellant said the shooting was an accident as he and Garcia "wrestled" over the gun. When appellant realized Garcia had been shot, he hit the release button on the gun's ammunition clip and set the gun on the bed. Appellant did not recall picking up the gun again after he threw it outside the room, but appellant acknowledged he had the gun in his hand when the police arrived at the scene. Applicable Law
In reviewing a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Lane v. State, 151 S.W.3d 188, 191-92 (Tex.Crim.App. 2004). The fact-finder is the exclusive judge of the witnesses' credibility and the weight to be given to their testimony. Harvey v. State, 135 S.W.3d 712, 717 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). In reviewing the factual sufficiency of the evidence, we view all of the evidence in a neutral light to determine whether the jury was rationally justified in finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404, 415 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006); see also Marshall v. State, No. AP-75048, 2006 WL 3733198, *5 (Tex.Crim.App. Dec. 20, 2006). Unless the record clearly reveals a different result is appropriate, we must defer to the fact-finder's determination concerning what weight to be given to contradictory testimony. Johnson v. State, 23 S.W.3d 1, 8 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). To obtain a conviction for murder, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant (1) knowingly or intentionally caused the death of Rachel Garcia by shooting her with a firearm, a deadly weapon, or (2) intended to cause serious bodily injury to Rachel Garcia and committed an act clearly dangerous to human life, i.e. shooting her with a firearm, that caused her death. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 19.02(b) (Vernon 2003). The jury was instructed it could find appellant guilty of murder or guilty of manslaughter, as included in the indictment. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 19.04 (Vernon 2003). Discussion
Appellant argues the evidence is legally and factually insufficient because if he is guilty of any crime, he is only guilty of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. Appellant asserts he did not intentionally cause Garcia's death because he and Garcia struggled and the gun accidentally fired. Appellant contends a rational jury would have found that he defended himself against Garcia and the shooting was accidental. The State responds that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support appellant's murder conviction. There was conflicting evidence presented. Three neighbors testified they heard appellant and Garcia fighting, heard sounds of appellant hitting Garcia and pushing her against the walls, and heard him threatening Garcia. Grant heard Garcia say, "[p]lease don't shoot me," and heard appellant order Garcia to get on her knees; Finley heard appellant say, "[b]itch, you gonna get buried tonight;" and Hill heard appellant say, "I'm bust your head to the white meat." Appellant testified both he and Garcia argued, cursed, and hit one another, and Garcia was the person who initially had the gun. When appellant tried to grab it from her, they struggled and the gun accidentally discharged. The medical examiner testified that because there was no gunpowder residue or abrasions in or around the wound, the gunshot occurred from a distance greater than the reach of Garcia's arm, which was twenty-five inches. It was the jury's function to resolve any conflicts in the evidence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.04 (Vernon 1979); Johnson, 23 S.W.3d at 9. The jury was free to accept or reject any and all of the evidence presented by either side. See Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103, 111 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). We may not substitute our own determination for that of the jury. Ortiz v. State, 93 S.W.3d 79, 87-88 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002); Scott v. State, 934 S.W.2d 396, 399 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1996, no pet.). We conclude the sum total of the evidence is sufficient to support a rational jury's finding beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant knowingly or intentionally caused the death of Rachel Garcia by shooting her with a firearm, and is legally and factually sufficient to support the jury's verdict. See Watson, 204 S.W.3d at 415; Lane, 151 S.W.3d at 191-92. We overrule appellant's points of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.