Martinez v. State, 04-81-00089-CR

Decision Date29 June 1983
Docket NumberNo. 04-81-00089-CR,04-81-00089-CR
PartiesJoseph Anthony MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Alonzo Villarreal, Jr., Uvalde, for appellant.

Earle Caddel, Dist. Atty., Uvalde, for appellee.

Before ESQUIVEL, CANTU and TIJERINA, JJ.

OPINION

ESQUIVEL, Justice.

Appellant was charged by indictment with the offense of murder. After a jury trial, on a plea of not guilty, appellant was found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. The jury assessed punishment at ten years' confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections. Appellant presents us with two grounds of error.

Appellant was charged with the murder of Reynaldo Flores Sanchez, by shooting him with a gun. The body of the deceased was found in the Leona River at Fort Inge Park in Uvalde County, Texas, on October 16, 1978. During the course of the afternoon and evening of October 16, 1978, appellant and the deceased had several confrontations during one of which the deceased allegedly hit appellant, knocking him down. Later on that evening, the deceased is said to have told appellant, "Your life is coming to an end." Appellant testified that thereafter, everything was fine until they were preparing to leave. At that time, the deceased asked appellant for a ride home. In appellant's own words:

A. That's when it started all up again.

Q. How did it start up again?

A. I walked back to the truck, ... to use the restroom. He come [sic] back there ... when I turned ... he kind of pushed me up against the back of the truck. Then when I started going back around ... to get in. That's when he pulled this knife out again. He told me, he said, 'you are dead ...' The gun was there. I got the gun. I didn't know it was loaded or anything. I just got the gun to protect myself....

According to appellant, the gun then went off accidentally when the deceased "grabbed it and pulled it."

On October 18, 1978, appellant and Michael Tate, who had been with appellant on the afternoon and evening of October 16, 1978, voluntarily appeared at the Uvalde County Sheriff's office. It was there that appellant signed a statement confessing to the murder.

In ground of error number one, appellant complains that the trial court erred in admitting appellant's written confession because the confession was not made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. Appellant moved to suppress the confession. The court, in accordance with Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774, 12 L.Ed.2d 908 (1964) and Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 38.22 (Vernon 1979), conducted a hearing outside the presence of the jury, and at which appellant testified, to determine the voluntariness of appellant's confession. Subsequently, the trial court entered an order finding that:

... the defendant was fully apprised of all ... rights, and he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived all of these ... rights prior to and during the making of the statement, and that he thereafter did make the written statement and the court is of the further opinion that said statement was made voluntarily and should be admissible as a matter of law and fact.

Furthermore, the court submitted the question of the voluntariness to the jury in its charge.

It is well settled that before a confession can be admitted into evidence, it must be shown to have been freely and voluntarily given. See Barton v. State, 605 S.W.2d 605, 607 (Tex.Cr.App.1980). The determination on whether a confession is voluntary must be based upon an examination of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the acquisition. Berry v. State, 582 S.W.2d 463, 465 (Tex.Cr.App.1979). We turn then to the facts of this case.

As previously noted, appellant and Michael Tate voluntarily appeared at the Uvalde County Sheriff's Office on October 18, 1978. Appellant was not under arrest nor was he summoned to appear. According to appellant himself, it was his idea "to go down to the sheriff's office." "... I needed to get it out of me. That's why I went down there, to tell them what had happened."

The sheriff's office was at that time interviewing witnesses in connection with the investigation of the deceased, Reynaldo Flores Sanchez. Once at the sheriff's office, appellant was taken into one room and Michael Tate into an adjoining one. Present were Texas Ranger H.J. Jackson, Deputy Sheriff Al Martinez and Deputy Sheriff Clyde Hobbs. According to Ranger Jackson, immediately after appellant sat down, he began talking and told Jackson that he (appellant) thought he and Michael Tate were probably the last ones to see the victim at Fort Inge; that they had left with the victim and gone into town but then had dropped the victim off at Memorial Park; thereafter, he and Michael Tate had gone to kill a deer.

According to Jackson, it was after appellant was through relating this story that he became suspicious. It was then that Officer Martinez in the presence of Ranger Jackson advised appellant of his rights as set out in a waiver of rights form. According to Ranger Jackson, appellant admitted understanding the rights read to him. The "Waiver of Rights" form signed by appellant reads as follows:

Waiver-of-Rights Form

On the 18 day of October, 19 78, at 2:30 P.M., H. Joaquin Jackson advised me, Joseph Anthony Martinez that I did not have to tell him anything; that anything I did tell him might be used in evidence against me in a court of law; that I had a right to an attorney; that I had a right to have the attorney present while the officer was talking to me or questioning me; that if I could not afford an attorney or lawyer, one would be obtained for me; that I did not have to say anything to the officer until my attorney or lawyer was present; that if I talked to the officers I could terminate or stop talking to the officers any time I wanted to and that any time I desired, an attorney would be called to assist me and no questions would be asked me until the attorney arrived.

/s/ Joseph Anthony Martinez

(signature of subject)

I, H. Joaquin Jackson, a member of the

(officer)

Texas Rangers on the 18 day of October, 19 78 at 2:30 P.M., administered the foregoing warning to Joseph Anthony Martinez before commencing an interview with him. He (signed) (refused to sign) the waiver.

/s/ H. Joaquin Jackson

(signature of officer)

/s/ Al Martinez

/s/ Clyde Hobbs

With respect to this waiver, the following colloquy took place during cross-examination of appellant:

Q. ... State's exhibit 2 which is a waiver of rights you gave that. Does that have your name on it?

A. Yes, sir, it does.

Q. Did you sign that?

A. Yes.

Q. That's after you went down there to give yourself up?

A. Yes.

A. Yes, sir.

After appellant signed the "Waiver of Rights" form, Ranger Jackson, who had left the office momentarily, returned and advised appellant that Michael Tate had implicated him in the killing and that he "was probably going to be charged with capital murder." According to Ranger Jackson, "At the time the man's clothing was gone, and his pants were gone. We didn't know but what the motive might have been robbery."

After appellant agreed to make a statement, Officer Martinez administered the warnings and explained them to him before taking his statement in longhand. When appellant began making his statement, Ranger Jackson left and returned five or ten minutes later to continue taking the statement as Officer Martinez left to make a phone call. The statement was then typed onto a form which contained the warnings required by art. 38.22. According to Ranger Jackson, appellant after reading the statement and prior to his signing it, was asked if he had read the whole statement, and if he understood the rights as set out in the statement. Appellant advised them he did. Appellant's statement 1 recounting the instant offense reads as follows:

I Joseph Anthony Martinez, before being interviewed, interrogated or questioned by H. Joaquin Jackson on October 18, 1978 at 2:47 P. M., at Sheriffs Dept. and before making this statement was warned by H. Joaquin Jackson, the person to whom this statement is given, that (1) I had and have the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement I make may be used in evidence against me at my trial;

(2) I had and have the right to an attorney, and that if I am unable to employ an attorney one will be provided for me;

(3) I had and have the right to have an attorney or lawyer present to advise me prior to and during any questioning or interrogation by peace officers or attorneys for the State; and (4) I had and have a right to terminate the questioning, interview or interrogation at any time.

I understand my rights as set out in this warning and knowing what they are I freely and voluntarily, without being forced or compelled by promises, threats or persuasion, waive these rights and make the following statement in writing:

My name is Joseph Anthony Martinez

My name is Joseph Anthony Martinez, I am 19 years of age, my [D]ate of birth is August 22, 1959, my address is Apartment 13-B Laurel Apartments, Garner Field [R]oad, Uvalde, Texas.

On Sunday, October 15, 1978, we were at City Memorial Park, at about 3 P.M. or 4 P.M. We, Kenny Martinez (my little brother), Charlie Martinez and myself got to the park. When we got there, Ernie Martinez, my cousin was already at the park, also Rosie Tenorio and Debbie, s[;]he drives a white car, were also there and then they left. Cindy Hartman was also at park when I got to the park. About 40 minutes later when Rosa and Debbie left. And I guess about 30 minutes or so later those other guys came in White [C]hevy, but the black guy was not with them. We hung around and drank beer, about a little bit before dark when Debbie and them came by and brought that guy "Ray" with them, we kept on drinking and everything, about an hour and a half after dark, [that guy called Ray, Said come here a minute I want to talk to you I...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Licon v. State, 08-00-00348-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 27 Marzo 2003
    ...a confession inadmissible. Gonzales v. State, 807 S.W.2d 830, 833 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, pet. ref'd); Martinez v. State, 656 S.W.2d 157, 162 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1983, pet. ref'd). In Gonzales, the defendant testified that he was scared and confused during the police interroga......
  • Jaggers v. State, 01-02-00725-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 4 Diciembre 2003
    ...overborne will. The police may be midwife to a declaration naturally born of remorse, or relief, or desperation...." Martinez v. State, 656 S.W.2d 157, 163 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1983, pet. ref'd) (quoting Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568, 81 S.Ct. 1860, 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)). The afore......
  • Gonzales v. State, 01-89-00183-CR
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 28 Marzo 1991
    ...and that the defendant was not fed during the interrogation and had not slept the night before. In Martinez v. State, 656 S.W.2d 157, 163 (Tex.App.--Fort Worth 1983, pet. ref'd), the court held a confession was voluntary even though defendant testified he was physically and emotionally dist......
  • Gallegos v. State
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 23 Julio 1986
    ...of the totality of the circumstances. Berry v. State, 582 S.W.2d 463, 465 (Tex.Crim.App.1979); Martinez v. State, 656 S.W.2d 157, 159 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1983, pet. ref'd). Here, in addition to his voluntary apearance, there was appellant's acknowledgment that his confession was volunta......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT