Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, affirmed Jose Bernardo Jimenez’s murder conviction on remand. The court addressed the sufficiency of evidence supporting the felony-theft predicate, the admissibility and voluntariness of Jimenez’s confession, the alleged invocation of the right to counsel, and the applicable standard of appellate review for suppression rulings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that the stolen truck had a value of more than $750.
- Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the felony-theft predicate and that Jimenez was in immediate flight from the theft when the collision occurred.
- Whether the indictment gave sufficient written notice that the State would seek an affirmative deadly-weapon finding based on use of an automobile that caused a death.
- Whether the trial court properly admitted Jimenez's written confession after finding that he waived his rights and that the confession was voluntary.
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial based on alleged double jeopardy arising from separate felony-murder convictions involving two victims.
Holdings
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Jimenez's written confession because the record supported its credibility-based findings that Jimenez was advised of his rights, waived them, and did not establish that police continued questioning after a valid invocation of counsel.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that Jimenez's confession was voluntarily made, without compulsion or coercion, and by denying the motion to suppress.
- The evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to find that the stolen truck was worth more than $750.
- The evidence was legally sufficient to establish that Jimenez was in immediate flight from the theft when he drove recklessly through the intersection and caused the fatal collision.
- The indictment sufficiently notified Jimenez that the State would seek a deadly-weapon finding because it alleged that he caused the victim's death by driving an automobile.
- Separate felony-murder convictions and punishments were permissible where one transaction caused the deaths of two different victims; each death constituted a separate allowable unit of prosecution.
Key quotations
“The trial judge was free to believe or disbelieve all or any part of a witness's testimony.” (at 503)
“Thus, a defendant commits a distinct offense against any person he injures and each of those injured constitutes a separate allowable unit of prosecution.” (at 511)
Factual background
Rivera's Ford pickup truck was stolen from South Padre Island. A truck matching its description was pursued toward Brownsville at speeds exceeding seventy to eighty-five miles per hour, through opposing traffic lanes, and through a red light before colliding with another vehicle, killing Brenda Lee Alvarado. The driver fled the wreck and was later found hiding on a roof with an ignition cover; police also recovered a dent puller commonly used to remove vehicle ignitions. Jimenez gave a written confession after questioning, but disputed that he knowingly waived his rights and claimed coercion, intoxication, shock, and a request for counsel.
Procedural history
A jury found Jimenez guilty of felony murder, and the trial court assessed forty years' imprisonment and restitution. The trial court denied his motion to suppress his written confession and later denied his motion for new trial. After an out-of-time appeal was granted, the Court of Appeals initially reversed and remanded based on its conclusion that the confession was illegally obtained. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals vacated that judgment and remanded for reconsideration; on remand, the Court of Appeals affirmed.