Latharian Devante Merritt v. State

Summary

The Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas affirmed Latharian Devante Merritt’s capital-murder conviction and life-without-parole sentence. The court held that Merritt failed to preserve his challenge to the probable-cause affidavit and, alternatively, that the affidavit did not contain material omissions under a Franks analysis. The court also held that the jury instruction distinguishing reasonable doubt from all possible doubt was not erroneous.

Holdings

1. Merritt did not preserve his appellate argument that the arrest-warrant affidavit was invalid because it omitted information about M.S.'s repeated lies. His trial objection challenged the sufficiency of the facts within the affidavit, whereas his appellate argument relied on Detective Knotts's outside-the-affidavit testimony and a Franks omission theory.
2. Even if Merritt's omission argument were considered under Franks, he did not establish that the affidavit contained material omissions made intentionally, knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth. The disclosed lie about how M.S. got home did not undermine probable cause because that fact was immaterial to her ability to observe and identify the participants.
3. The trial court did not err by instructing the jury that the prosecution need not prove guilt beyond all possible doubt and must exclude all reasonable doubt.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Merritt preserved a challenge under Franks v. Delaware that the arrest-warrant affidavit omitted material information about M.S.'s untruthfulness.
2. Whether, even if considered on the merits, the alleged omissions from the arrest-warrant affidavit were material and made intentionally, knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth so as to invalidate the warrant.
3. Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury that the State was not required to prove guilt beyond all possible doubt but was required to exclude all reasonable doubt.

Disposition

affirmed