Rodriguez v. State, No. 14-07-00142-CR (Tex. App. 9/2/2008)
| Decision Date | 02 September 2008 |
| Docket Number | No. 14-07-00142-CR.,14-07-00142-CR. |
| Parties | TOMMY GALINDO RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
On Appeal from the 178th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 1073193.
Affirmed as Reformed.
Panel consists of Chief Justice HEDGES, Justice BOYCE, and SENIOR Justice PRICE.*
Appellant, Tommy Galindo Rodriguez, was indicted on the offense of first-degree murder. The jury convicted him of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, and a $10,000 fine. In five issues, appellant challenges the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdict, as well as alleged evidentiary errors committed by the trial court. Appellant also argues, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred in entering a second enhancement finding in the judgment. We reform the judgment, and affirm.
On the evening of November 12, 2005, appellant and his girlfriend, Sallie Millan, went to a party hosted by the parents of Maria Melchor. They were accompanied by the complainant, John Melchor,1 and one of Sallie's children. Maria testified that appellant, Sallie, and the complainant were all drinking alcohol at the party.
Sometime during the party, Jose Sarmiento, Maria's cousin, approached Sallie and asked her whether she remembered him. According to Maria, when Sallie answered "yes," appellant became "jealous" and "upset." He raised his voice and asked Sallie how she knew Sarmiento. When Sallie responded that she knew him because she had seen him before, and that he was Maria's cousin, appellant pushed Sallie. This angered the complainant.
The complainant then pushed appellant, who fell to the ground. Maria testified that appellant then "got very upset," stood up, and pulled a "dagger"2 out of his right pocket. Appellant lunged toward the complainant with the dagger and tried to stab him. Appellant also tried to stab Sarmiento and Maria's uncle, Ruben Flores, as well as another of Maria's cousins, Ruben Flores, Jr.3 George then attempted to restrain the complainant, who at this point had retrieved a long fork from the nearby barbeque pit.4 George was able to wrest the fork from the complainant, while Maria and other family members tried to calm appellant. Eventually, Sarmiento disarmed appellant and gave the dagger to Maria. Maria then handed the dagger to her mother, who hid it in the dirt underneath some nearby plants.
Appellant, Sallie, and the complainant continued arguing, and finally decided to leave the party. Sallie requested the dagger from Maria, who initially refused to return it. Maria testified that she eventually gave the dagger to Sallie, who then hid it between the door and the front seat on the driver's side of her car. Appellant, Sallie, her son, and the complainant then got into Sallie's car and left the party.
The four drove to the complainant's house. Sallie testified that appellant, who was in the back seat of the car, kept repeating, which she interpreted as a threat. When they arrived, the complainant ordered appellant out of the car, telling him to walk home. The complainant also told appellant not to go to Sallie's apartment. Appellant then walked off, and the complainant informed Sallie that he would accompany her to her apartment because he didn't "want [appellant] going over there and probably beat[ing] [her] up." Sallie, her son, and the complainant then drove to Sallie's apartment.
When they arrived, Sallie's daughter Jasmine informed her that appellant had called to tell Sallie he was coming over. Appellant then called a second time, apologized for his behavior, and asked Sallie to pick him up. She told him that she would and left her apartment to attempt to locate him. When she was unable to do so, she returned home. Appellant then called a third time. Sallie testified that appellant was "angry" and "upset." Accusing her of lying about attempting to pick him up, he told her that he was coming over. Sallie specifically told appellant not to come over, then hung up on him.
Approximately thirty minutes later, appellant arrived at Sallie's apartment and knocked on the door. Sallie testified that the complainant was seated at a table adjacent to the kitchen area. She also testified that she had placed the dagger behind the radio on the table where the complainant was seated, but that the complainant was unaware the dagger was there. Appellant again apologized for his behavior and promised her that he would remain calm and "behave" if she let him in. Sallie eventually decided to allow appellant to enter the apartment.
As she unlocked the door, appellant shoved the door open and "went straight to the kitchen." Sallie testified that she could hear appellant opening and searching through the kitchen drawers. Jasmine, who was seated on the sofa in the living room, then exclaimed,
The complainant then stood up and walked toward the kitchen. Sallie told Jasmine to go next door and call the police.5 Sallie then grabbed the dagger, handed it to the complainant, and followed behind him. Sallie testified that the complainant held the dagger to his side, behind his right leg, with the blade pointed toward the floor. Appellant, who had obtained a butcher knife from one of the kitchen drawers, pointed the knife at the complainant, who repeatedly asked appellant to put it down. Appellant began walking toward the complainant with the knife still pointed at him. The complainant raised the dagger from behind his leg, while Sallie repeatedly told appellant to put the knife down.
Sallie testified that things then "happened real fast." Appellant and the complainant "were fighting," and at one point both were "bent over with the knife." By this time, the complainant had dropped the dagger, and was holding appellant's hand "trying to keep [appellant] from stabbing him" with the knife. The complainant then called for Sallie, who jumped in between the two. Sallie "saw blood," but she did not see the knife go into the complainant and did not know that he had been stabbed in his "stomach."6 Sallie exclaimed, "You stabbed my brother," at which time appellant and the complainant let go of the knife.
The complainant fell back against the wall and onto the kitchen floor, unable to get up. The complainant, who was bleeding, requested an ambulance. Sallie testified that appellant "walk[ed] real slow" out of the kitchen and toward the front door of the apartment. Jasmine, who by this time had returned from the neighbor's apartment and was standing in the doorway, exclaimed, "Mom, [appellant] is trying to leave." Thinking appellant was trying to flee the scene, Sallie knocked appellant down, telling him "You're not going anywhere." Sallie then called for an ambulance.
Police and paramedics eventually arrived at the scene. Officers Kelly Berg and Danel Sanchez of the Houston Police Department were the first to respond. Each testified that Sallie answered the door with the knife and the dagger in her hands. Appellant was seated on the kitchen floor, with the complainant's head in his lap. The kitchen floor was covered in blood. Officers Berg and Sanchez asked who had the stabbed the complainant, and appellant responded, "I did." Officer Sanchez then handcuffed appellant and seated him on the sofa in the living room.
Sallie was then transported to LBJ Hospital. While awaiting treatment for her injuries, Sallie gave an initial statement to Officer Sanchez.7 Appellant and the complainant were taken to Ben Taub Hospital,8 where the complainant later died from his injuries.
Appellant was subsequently indicted on the offense of first-degree murder. The jury convicted him of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, and a $10,000 fine. This appeal followed.
In five issues, appellant challenges various aspects of his conviction. In his first and second issues, appellant contends that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to prove that, at the time of the alleged offense, he had the mens rea required for manslaughter, specifically, that he acted recklessly. In his third and fourth issues, appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in (1) excluding testimony from Lina Hernandez; and (2) admitting testimony from Officer Sanchez regarding the reliability of Sallie's initial statement to police investigators. In his final issue, appellant argues that the judgment should be reformed to delete that there was a plea or a finding on a second enhancement paragraph. We analyze each of appellant's issues in the order he has presented them.
In his first and second issues, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for manslaughter. Appellant specifically contends that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to prove that he recklessly caused the death of the complainant.
When reviewing challenges to both the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdict, we first review the legal sufficiency challenge. See Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126, 133 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). In reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we look at the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and determine whether any rational...
To continue reading
Request your trial