Gonzalez v. State
| Decision Date | 25 January 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 08-14-00293-CR,08-14-00293-CR |
| Parties | JUAN ANTONIO GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from 346th District Court of El Paso County, Texas
Appellant was indicated for the capital murder of a police officer. He was convicted of the lesser charge of murder, indicating that the jury did not believe the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt either that the police officer was killed during the performance of his duties, or that Appellant knew the decedent to be a police officer (or possibly both). Appellant raises fifteen issues challenging the murder conviction. We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand for a new trial because of the erroneous admission of evidence in the guilt innocence phase.
FACTUAL SUMMARY
This case arises from an incident involving the decedent (twenty-eight-year-old policeman Jonathan Molina) and three youths (Juan Gomez, Alan Medrano, and Appellant). The incident occurred while the youths were walking along the sidewalk of a busy residential street, and Gomez was claimed to have "keyed" several parked vehicles, including that of the decedent.
Molina emerged from his residence and first confronted Gomez of keying his car. As we describe in more detail below, the encounter escalated into a fight, during which Officer Molina was taken down by Appellant and in the process struck his head on the sidewalk. The blow led to a fatal brain injury. The details of what occurred that day were presented through two of the three youths, several passersby, and through Appellant's later Facebook posts. We recount the differing versions of events as testified to before the jury.
The Passersby
Mario Ramos was driving westbound along Trowbridge Avenue the late afternoon of September 25, 2012, when he noticed two males involved in an argument. He pulled over about two or three houses down to observe through his side view mirror and watched for about two to three minutes. He noticed a teenager and older male face to face and apparently arguing. Two other teens were several feet back and one was motioning as if to gesture, let's leave. The teenager engaged in the argument took a couple of steps towards the older man, causing him to move backward a few steps. Ramos saw the teenager punch the older male.1 He agreed that he lost sight of both men while he parked his vehicle, and because the teen had his back to Ramos, he did not have an unobstructed view of the older male. Both the teen and the older male then fell. About ten seconds later, the three teens began walking away, and later broke into a run. The teen who was involved in the actual fight was the tallest of the three teens. Mr. Ramos circled around with his car, saw that the older male was on the ground apparently seizing, and he called 911. Later at the police station, Mr. Ramos picked out a picture of Appellant as one of the teens, but qualified the identification: Appellant was "one of the guys that was in the group but not sure [sic]."
Laura Mena was also westbound on Trowbridge that afternoon. She saw a confrontation between three younger males and one older male. She made a U-turn and by the time she parked and exited her car, the three younger males were already walking down the street. The older male was on the ground apparently seizing and she also notified 911. She called out to the youths to come back, but the tallest of the three threw his hand up in the air and pointed his index finger skyward.
Erin Lile was driving eastbound on Trowbridge at that time. She saw what looked like an after school fight. Two males were in close proximity and facing each other in an apparent verbal confrontation. She continued to observe as she passed by, and was eventually looking at the events through her rear view mirror. She saw arm movements, and the two broke away from each other, separating apart in distance. The younger male then "bum rushed" the older man, which Lile described as one person running into the chest of another. This lifted the older man off his feet and forced him to the ground. She then saw the younger man get on top of and "pummel" the older man (which she described as punching him in the face repeatedly). She made a U-turn and stayed at the scene until the police arrived. The older man was making a snoring sound, but was attempting to get up. His forehead was knotted up and his whole face was "blown up." She also saw the three youths leave the scene.
The Participants' Version of Events
The three younger males referenced above were Appellant, then age 17, Tony Gomez, age 18, and Alan Medrano, age 19. Appellant stood 6'2" and easily was the tallest of the three. The older male was El Paso Police Officer Jonathan Molina.2 He was six feet tall and weighed 275 pounds. At trial, Medrano testified for the State as a hostile witness. As we note below, his trial testimony strayed at times from a written and videotaped statement that he gave shortly after the incident. Appellant also testified to the events of that day. Tony Gomez invoked his right not to incriminate himself and was never questioned in front of the jury. We recount Medrano and Appellant's testimony as presented to the jury.
Alan Medrano
Alan Medrano, Tony Gomez, and Appellant were walking home from school and were all friends. As they were walking along the sidewalk on Trowbridge, Medrano noticed that Gomez had a piece of metal and was scratching a car. Gomez scratched another car, which turned out to belong to Officer Molina. As they were crossing the street, Officer Molina came out of a house and yelled at them to come back. Medrano originally told the police that Officer Molina was yelling "Hey bro." The three ignored him and kept walking.
When they were in the next block down, Officer Molina then pulled up beside them in his car. Officer Molina confronted Gomez, saying Gomez denied he did so and the two argued until Officer Molina started to curse at Gomez, referring to him as a "little kid" and a "fag." While both Appellant and Medrano testified that Officer Molina used the word "fag" (and Appellant also recalled using the word "faggot"), Medrano's statements to the police never included that pejorative. Officer Molina continued to accuse Gomez of scratching his car and Gomez continued to deny it, and the two got closer and closer.
Appellant then got in between Officer Molina and Gomez. Appellant first tried to calm the situation by telling Officer Molina to "chill out."3 But they started arguing and got progressively closer to each other. At one point, Officer Molina told Appellant and Medrano to leave, but Appellant replied that it was a public sidewalk. As the argument progressed, Officer Molina then identified himself as a police officer but when Appellant asked to see a badge, Officer Molina responded, "I don't have to show shit."
The argument continued with Officer Molina and Appellant being about three inches from each other, nose to nose, until Officer Molina pushed Appellant with his shoulder. Medrano also testified that Appellant responded immediately by hitting Officer Molina. But at trial Medrano also testified, consistent with his earlier police statement, that Officer Molina had turned his attention away from Appellant and began to yell at Gomez, when Appellant "hit him, because he got mad."
Medrano testified that after being hit, Officer Molina raised his hands "like he was ready to fight" and Appellant hit him again. Medrano had not mentioned Officer Molina putting up his fists in his police statement. Then according to Medrano, Appellant took Officer Molina down by "kind of trip[ing] him." As Medrano explained it: "That's when [Appellant] picked him up from the legs and dropped him." The take down was further described as a tackle.
When Officer Molina fell to the ground, Appellant fell next to him and then got on top, punching Molina two or three times in the face. Medrano testified that Officer Molina was putting his hands up as Appellant was hitting him but his earlier statement had also not mentioned that fact. When Officer Molina stopped responding, or possibly at the urging of his friends, Appellant broke off and stood up. Medrano had told the police that Officer Molina looked "stiff" and was just lying there with his eyes closed.
The three youths walked to end of the block, ignoring the call of someone to come back, and then they started to run. Medrano testified that Appellant was "really, really mad," as Officer Molina had "really pissed [him] off." Appellant had complained to Medrano that Officer Molina was yelling at him for no reason, was cussing at him, was not his father, and was "no one to be yelling at him like that." Medrano was apprehended by the police within ten minutes of the event.
Appellant's testimony
Appellant similarly described walking home from school with his friends. As they were walking along Trowbridge, he claimed that Officer Molina came out of his house and first called out, "You fucking faggots." The three youths ignored him and kept walking. Officer Molina thereafter pulled up alongside them in his car, got out appearing "very angry", and yelled at Gomez, "Hey, you fucking faggot". . . Why the fuck did you scratch my car?"
Appellant also recalled that Gomez denied doing anything and Gomez and Officer Molina began arguing eventually getting about an arm's length apart. The argument grew heated with continued use of profanity. At that point, Appellant stepped in and pulled Gomez back, telling both to "calm down."
Officer Molina then turned to Appellant and started "cussing" at him.4 Appellant then said let's just go home. He felt Officer Molina was "real aggressive" making comments and threats that caused Appellant to be afraid for himself and his friends. Even though Appellant was the taller of the two, Officer Molina was considerably stockier. Appellant agreed...
To continue reading
Request your trial