Braughton v. State
| Citation | 522 S.W.3d 714 |
| Decision Date | 20 April 2017 |
| Docket Number | NO. 01–15–00393–CR,01–15–00393–CR |
| Parties | Christopher Ernest BRAUGHTON, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
Niles Illich, Dallas, TX, for Appellant.
Devon Anderson, District Attorney, Melissa P. Hervey, Assistant District Attorney, Houston, TX, for The State of Texas.
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Huddle.
We issued our original opinion in this case on December 29, 2016. Appellant, Christopher Braughton, filed a motion for rehearing. We overrule the motion for rehearing, withdraw our previous opinion, and issue this substitute opinion. The disposition remains the same.
Chris Braughton, age 21, shot Emmanuel Dominguez, age 27, on the street outside Chris's parents' home at approximately 10:00 p.m. The shooting followed an episode of road rage between Dominguez and Chris's father, Christopher Braughton Sr., age 40, while Braughton Sr. was driving home with his wife and other son, age 13. According to the statement of Chris's mother, Dominguez "cut us off and then pulled up beside us and followed us home." Although many of the events after that point are disputed, it is undisputed that Dominguez and Braughton Sr. engaged in a physical altercation in which Dominguez punched Braughton Sr., that Chris ran out of the house brandishing a gun in an attempt to protect his father, and that the fight stopped at least momentarily when Dominguez knocked Braughton Sr. to the ground and Chris first spoke. The evidence is mixed on whether Dominguez said he had a gun, but the evidence is undisputed that no gun was found on Dominguez or within his reach and that Chris aimed his gun at Dominguez and shot him once, killing him.
A jury found Chris guilty of murder and assessed his punishment at 20 years' confinement.1 In three issues, Chris argues that (1) the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that he had the required mental state to commit murder; (2) the evidence is legally insufficient to reject his claims of self-defense and defense of others; and (3) the trial court committed reversible error by denying his request to provide an instruction in the jury charge on the lesser-included offense of deadly conduct.
We affirm.
Emmanuel Dominguez, the complainant, was a United States Marine, preparing to leave the Marine Corps and using up his vacation time until his discharge. In early May 2013, Dominguez moved to Spring, Texas and rented a house with his girlfriend, Jessica Cavender, who was also a United States Marine and had recently been assigned as a recruiter in Conroe, Texas. Their house was on Greenland Oak Court.
On May 24, 2013, Dominguez and Cavender went to a restaurant, where they ate, drank beer, and socialized. While there, they met another Marine who invited them to an icehouse, where they continued drinking. Sometime later, yet another veteran invited them to a karaoke bar, where they continued socializing and drinking. While at the karaoke bar, Dominguez and Cavender got into a verbal disagreement, and Cavender refused to accompany him to their home. Dominguez, who was intoxicated, left alone on his motorcycle.2
That same evening, Chris's father ("Braughton Sr."), mother ("Mrs. Braughton"), and younger brother were dining out while Chris, age 21, stayed home at his parents' house. The Braughtons, like Dominguez, lived on Greenland Oak Court, but Chris had never met Dominguez. After dinner, at approximately 10:00 p.m., Braughton Sr. began driving home, with Mrs. Braughton and their younger son riding in the family vehicle.
Braughton Sr. testified that, as they were nearing their home, he was driving approximately 15 to 18 miles per hour in an area with a 20–mile–per–hour speed limit when he saw a "big bright light" immediately behind his vehicle. He testified that he then heard "a really loud revving sound," and then a vehicle alarm alerted that there was an object very close to the vehicle's rear bumper. He determined from the light, the engine sound, and the vehicle's alarm that a motorcycle was very close behind his car.
According to Braughton Sr., Dominguez, who was driving the motorcycle, came around the side of the car, "tried to swerve into the side of the car," then came around the front of the car and "slam[med] on his brakes." The vehicle's proximity sensors again sounded. Braughton Sr. "slam[med]" on his own brakes to avoid hitting the motorcycle, then sped around the motorcycle and continued heading home. Dominguez followed the Braughton family onto Greenland Oak Court, where, unknown to either driver, they both lived.
As the Braughtons approached their house in their vehicle, Mrs. Braughton called Chris and told him they were being chased. Braughton Sr. testified that his wife said, while Mrs. Braughton recalled saying, The call lasted less than seven seconds, and Mrs. Braughton did not tell Chris to come outside, arm himself, or indeed to do anything at all. Braughton Sr. and Mrs. Braughton testified that they believed that Dominguez was attempting to rob or carjack them. No one, however, called either 9–1–1 or a non-emergency police line at that time.
According to Braughton Sr., the motorcycle "start[ed] coming around the car" again and blocked the Braughtons' driveway. Braughton Sr. drove around the cul-de-sac at the end of Greenland Oak Court, stopping on the opposite side of the street from his home. Dominguez stopped his motorcycle near the driveway to the home of Robert Bannon, who lived in the home between the Braughton residence and the house rented by Dominguez. Bannon, who was sitting in his driveway at the time, noticed that the motorcycle was only one or two feet away from the Braughtons' car and "thought [Dominguez] didn't know how to drive a motorcycle because he looked like he was kind of wobbling." Dominguez dismounted or fell off the motorcycle without engaging the kickstand, and then he either threw down the motorcycle or let it fall to its side in the street.
According to Glen Irving, a neighbor who witnessed the events, Dominguez "rather quickly" approached the Braughtons' car, and Braughton Sr. got out of his vehicle. But according to Bannon, Braughton Sr. "quickly" got out of the car and "immediately yelled" at Dominguez, demanding to know, "Why the f____ you following me so close for?" Both Bannon and Irving testified that the two men yelled and swore at each other. Irving also testified that Dominguez began punching Braughton Sr. in his face and "beating him up," while Braughton Sr. attempted to defend himself.
Braughton Sr. testified that, while these events were unfolding, he was yelling to his wife, "Get inside," and, "Call 9–1–1," at which point Dominguez began punching him. Braughton Sr. testified that Dominguez hit him two or three times. Dominguez then knocked Braughton Sr. to the ground. This altercation occurred closer to the motorcycle than to the Braughtons' car.3
Meanwhile, Chris, who was inside the Braughtons' home, had run to the front door and heard a "loud motorcycle noise." He went to his parents' bedroom, where he kept a 9–millimeter handgun that he had purchased approximately three months earlier. He retrieved the gun and the magazine, which was kept separately, inserted the magazine into the gun, and pulled back the slide to chamber a bullet. At this point, according to Chris, the safety mechanism on the gun was disengaged and the gun was ready to fire.
During the altercation between Dominguez and Braughton Sr., Chris came out of his parents' house with the loaded gun, saw Dominguez hitting Braughton Sr., and said two or three times, "I have a gun," or, "Stop, I have a gun." Chris testified that, when he left the house, he had not seen or heard that anyone outside had a weapon of any kind and did not know who had started the fight. There is no evidence in the record that Chris knew that a physical fight was underway before he left the house with a gun. And Chris conceded at trial that the fight was closer to the motorcycle than to the car, indicating that his father had moved farther than had Dominguez. Braughton Sr. did not see Chris exit the house; rather, he first saw him when Chris was three feet away from Dominguez, pointing the gun at Dominguez. According to Mrs. Braughton's sworn statement, she said around this time,
Witnesses at trial gave conflicting accounts of what happened next. Chris, Braughton Sr., Mrs. Braughton, and Irving all testified that Dominguez then verbally responded to Chris and either moved toward or reached into the saddlebags on the motorcycle. The details of their testimony, however—whether Dominguez indicated that he had a gun and whether he actually reached his motorcycle, which was some unspecified distance away from the fight—conflicted. Specifically, Chris testified that Dominguez said, then reached into a saddlebag on the motorcycle. He later testified, however, that Dominguez used the word "something," not "a gun."
According to Braughton Sr., Dominguez "reache[d] down and he [said], 'You got a gun, m_____f_____, I have something for your f______ a__.' " Elsewhere in his testimony, however, Braughton Sr. recalled that Dominguez said "gun," not "something." Braughton Sr. specifically testified that Dominguez "reache[d] in [to]" the saddlebag before he was shot.
Mrs. Braughton testified that Dominguez "reache[d] towards his bike, the boxes on his bike," and quoted him as saying, Elsewhere in her testimony, she reported the second...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kitchens v. State
...we may not act as a "thirteenth juror" and overturn a jury verdict simply because we disagree with it. Braughton v. State, 522 S.W.3d 714, 734-35 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017), aff'd, 569 S.W.3d 592 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). Therefore, we hold that a rational jury could have found that......
-
Gonzalez v. State, 08-19-00062-CR
...witness's testimony and is not required to accept a witness's testimony even when it is not contradicted by other witnesses. See Braughton, 522 S.W.3d at 732; see also Lancon v. State, 253 S.W.3d 699, 707 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008) (recognizing that a jury may choose to believe or disbelieve the ......
-
Braughton v. State
...on the lesser-included offense of deadly conduct. The court of appeals upheld his conviction. Braughton v. State , 522 S.W.3d 714, 719, 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017) (substitute op.).11 With respect to appellant's complaint regarding the sufficiency of the evidence, the court rea......
-
Goffney v. State
...to raise a defense as long as the evidence would support a rational jury finding as to the defense"); Braughton v. State, 522 S.W.3d 714, 730 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017), aff'd, 569 S.W.3d 592 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). Thus, we hold that the trial court did not err in including an in......