Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:William Cathey and appellant were both inmates at the Coffield Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant was accidentally returned to Cathey’s cell instead of his own. Appellant had a fan motor wrapped in a sock and severely beat Cathey with the improvised weapon. Cathey suffered extensive injuries and later died in the hospital. The jury found appellant guilty of murder and assessed punishment at life imprisonment. This appeal followed. Appellant brought nine points of error. HOLDING:Affirmed. The court found that a complaint that the trial court had improperly struck jurors for cause was not preserved and thus waived. The court overruled appellant’s point of error regarding the trial court’s decision to allow appellant to be impeached with evidence of his prior felony conviction. The ruling allowing admission of this evidence was not outside “a zone of reasonable disagreement,” because appellant’s testimony and his credibility were very important in light of the defense’s reliance on facts and statements of intent not addressed by other evidence. The court overruled appellant’s point of error that the state failed to give appropriate notice of anticipated expert witnesses and that the trial court should have excluded the testimony of four of the state’s witnesses. The court noted that the remedy for a discovery abuse is to request a continuance, but this was not done. Appellant claimed that medical negligence caused Cathey’s death, but the court held that a rational jury could have concluded that appellant caused Cathey’s death, that there was not another cause sufficient to cause the death, or that appellant’s conduct was clearly the cause of Cathey’s death. Evaluating the evidence in a neutral light, the court held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the conviction. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed an assistant warden to offer an opinion as to whether the fan motor was a deadly weapon. Appellant also claimed that the court erred when it allowed a witness to testify that appellant identified himself as a member of the Latin Kings prison gang. Appellant argued that the witness’ statement should have been excluded because it was not recorded and taken under legal compunction, but the court found that this point of error was waived for failure to raise it in the trial court. OPINION:Hoyle, J; Worthen, C.J., Griffith, and Hoyle, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.