Zapata v. State
| Decision Date | 19 June 2019 |
| Docket Number | NO. 03-17-00537-CR,03-17-00537-CR |
| Parties | Ray Castro Zapata, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
FROM THE 119TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY
NO. B-17-0082-SB, HONORABLE MARTIN "BROCK" JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING
Ray Castro Zapata appeals his convictions on two counts of forgery of a financial instrument, one count of theft of property valued at more than $200,000, and one count of money laundering in the amount of $20,000 or more but less than $100,000. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 32.21(d), 31.03(e)(7), 34.02(e)(2).1 Zapata's offenses involve property belonging to the estate of John Edward Sullivan and began with the forgery of Sullivan's will. A jury assessed Zapata's punishment at: (1) 180 days' confinement in state jail and a $10,000 fine for each count of forgery, with the confinement sentences running concurrently; (2) five years' imprisonmentand a $10,000 fine for theft, with a recommendation that the prison sentence be suspended and probated for 10 years; and (3) two years' imprisonment and a $10,000 fine for money laundering, with a recommendation that the prison sentence be suspended and probated for two years. The district court rendered judgments on the jury's verdicts. The district court also ordered Zapata to pay $1.8 million in restitution to Sullivan's estate. In three issues, Zapata contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions for forgery and theft; (2) the district court erred by admitting his grand-jury testimony into evidence; and (3) the district court's restitution order should be reversed because no evidence supported the initial valuation of the estate. We will affirm the district court's judgments of conviction and order of restitution.
BACKGROUND2
The circumstances surrounding Sullivan's death and his purported will resulted in a multitude of criminal prosecutions and civil litigation.3 We address the facts relevant to Zapata's appeal in some detail, given his challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions.
Zapata's assistance with Sullivan's bail bond and actions after Sullivan's death
Twenty-one witnesses testified during Zapata's lengthy jury trial. The jury heard that Sullivan was seventy-seven years old and a resident of San Angelo when he was arrested in March 2014 for online solicitation of a minor and possession of child pornography. His bond was set at $1 million for each offense. Sullivan secured his bonds for these offenses with theassistance of two local bondsmen, Zapata and Armando Martinez.4 Sullivan paid Martinez 15% of the $2 million total bonds ($300,000), and Zapata received $150,000 of that amount.5 Sullivan was released from jail on April 1, 2014. Thereafter, Zapata introduced Sullivan to John Stacy Young, who became Sullivan's criminal-defense attorney.
The bailmen considered Sullivan a flight risk. Martinez testified that Sullivan had a condominium in Spain and the money to do "whatever he wished." Thus, while Sullivan was released on bail, Zapata closely monitored Sullivan's whereabouts. Zapata drove Sullivan to get food, monitor Sullivan's real-estate holdings, and collect rent on Sullivan's properties.
Text messages between Zapata and Young showed that Zapata took Sullivan to a meeting with Young on June 3, 2014, the day before Sullivan's body was discovered. After the meeting, Zapata was unsure whether Young would need to see Sullivan again:
Zapata did not testify at trial, but the jury heard evidence6 that Martinez was with him when they discovered Sullivan's body on June 4, 2014. Martinez recounted the events of that day for the jury. Near noon, Zapata called Martinez from outside Sullivan's house, reporting that Sullivan did not answer when Zapata knocked on the door to Sullivan's home and called his name. Martinez told Zapata that Sullivan might have had someone take him to the senior citizens' center and to check the house again after lunch. A few hours later, Zapata called Martinez to report that Sullivan was still not answering his door. After stopping at the senior citizens' center and confirming that Sullivan had not been there that morning, Martinez drove to meet Zapata at Sullivan's house. Their knocks at the front door went unanswered, and they proceeded to the back of the house. Through a window, Martinez saw that all the box fans and lights were on inside the house. Zapata removed a window screen and a box fan from an open window, and Martinez climbed inside. Zapata used his phone to photograph Martinez entering the house, and then followed him in. They split up, searching the house.
Inside the bathroom, Martinez found Sullivan undressed and slumped from the toilet into the bathtub, dead. Martinez called to Zapata, who came to the bathroom and photographed Sullivan. Martinez stated that Zapata sent the photo to Sullivan's criminal-defense attorney, Young, and called to confirm that Young had received the photo. But Zapata told a grand jury that he did not send that photo to anyone. While Zapata was speaking with Young, Martinez told Zapata that they needed to get out of there and call the authorities, but Zapata told him to wait and give him some time. Shuffling through papers on Sullivan's desk, Zapata saidthat he had to find a document with "John Sullivan's signature on it." Martinez testified that Zapata eventually let him call 911, and while he did so, Zapata went into the kitchen and retrieved a book. The book was a missal, a small religious book that looked like a bible. Zapata took the missal, which he told Martinez that Sullivan had given to him, and placed it in his truck before the police arrived.
The jury heard an excerpt of Zapata's testimony at an October 7, 2014 probate proceeding during which Zapata recalled Sullivan saying that he had "written something here" in the missal and "if there's something goes on [sic], it's right here." Zapata said that he took the missal to Sullivan's attorney with "no idea what was in there." Additionally, Zapata testified to a grand jury that when he dropped off the missal to Young at his office, Young's probate attorney Christianson O. Hartman was already there, although nobody knew that a will was coming.
Emergency application for Sullivan's cremation and probate proceedings
On June 5, 2014, the day after Sullivan's body was found, Hartman—an attorney in Sweetwater who had an office building near Young's—took the missal to the Tom Green County Clerk's office and filed it as Sullivan's holographic will. The alleged will was handwritten on a page at the back of the missal and dated June 2, 2014. The alleged will listed Zapata as a witness and named Young, whom Sullivan had known for two months before his death, as the sole beneficiary. The deputy clerk who handled the filing, Amanda Deanda, testified that Hartman was "very nervous filing this will." She also thought it was unusual that "the will was written on the 2nd of June and [Sullivan] died on the 4th of June, and they filed the will on the 5th of June."
On June 10, 2014, Hartman filed an emergency application with the probate court to cremate Sullivan's remains. Two days later, Sullivan was cremated. Several witnessestestified at trial that cremation would have been contrary to Sullivan's particular religious beliefs. On the same day as Sullivan's cremation, and before the will was probated giving Young control of Sullivan's estate, Zapata sent a text to Young indicating that Sullivan's house had been cleared of all papers and that shredding was underway:
Also before the will was probated, Sullivan's longtime attorney Joe Hernandez saw Young at a criminal-law conference in San Antonio. Hernandez testified that Young asked him if he had heard that Sullivan, an orphan, had died and left a holographic will witnessed by Young's "good friend," Zapata. Young also mentioned that he had an upcoming hearing before probate Judge Ben Nolen. Hernandez told Young that Sullivan had a half-sister named Louise who lived in Worcester, Massachusetts. Hernandez also said that he had contact information for her and other family members somewhere in his office. Young responded, As Young was backing away, Hernandez chastised him saying, Young then said, "You know what Brother, I am going to have to buy some of your time." Hernandez understood Young's remark as a request for an attorney-client-privileged visit with him, so that he would be unable to repeat what Young had just told him.
Judge Ben Nolen testified that during the June 16, 2014 probate hearing in his court, he placed both Young and Zapata under oath as witnesses. According to Judge Nolen, Zapata testified as to all things contained in the probate application, including that the will was inSullivan's handwriting, that Zapata had witnessed Sullivan signing the will, and that the will was in the back of a bible that Sullivan owned since childhood. Judge Nolen signed an order on the same day as the hearing, admitting Sullivan's holographic will to probate as a muniment of title and giving all Sullivan's property to Young. Judge Nolen testified that he would not have admitted the...
To continue reading
Request your trial