Grimaldo v. State

Grimaldo · Texas Court of Criminal Appeals · February 10, 2015 · No. PD-1445-14

Summary

This document is Gilbert Grimaldo's pro se Petition for Discretionary Review to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals challenging his conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. It argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove aggravated assault, use or exhibition of a deadly weapon, and the appellant's identity, and also raises claims concerning compulsory process and alleged Brady violations.

Court
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
February 10, 2015
Docket number
PD-1445-14
Procedural posture
Petition for discretionary review following a jury conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and a repeat-offender enhancement, a sixty-year sentence, and affirmance by the Second District Court of Appeals of Texas at Fort Worth.
Standard of review
For a legal-sufficiency challenge, whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. The petition attributes this standard to Jackson v. Virginia.
Precedential value
none
Parties
Gilbert Grimaldo v. The State of Texas
Disposition
other

Topics

appellate procedurecriminal proceduresuppression of evidencesixth amendmentdue process

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal appellate procedureevidenceconstitutional criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support Grimaldo's conviction for aggravated assault.
  2. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that Grimaldo used or exhibited a deadly weapon.
  3. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to establish Grimaldo's identity as the assailant.
  4. Whether alleged failures to secure or investigate defense witnesses violated the Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process or due process.
  5. Whether the State's alleged failure to investigate or disclose potentially exculpatory information constituted a Brady violation.

Key quotations

The appellate standard for reviewing a legal sufficiency challenge is whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. (at 7)
However, a knife may become a deadly weapon and the court have recognized several factors, to consider when determine a knife was used as deadly weapon (at 10)

Factual background

The evidence described in the petition concerned an altercation between Grimaldo and Sandra Burrola, his former common-law wife, at her Arlington apartment on May 29, 2011. Burrola testified that Grimaldo forced his way into the apartment, struck and choked her, threatened her and her children, held a knife against her throat, pushed her down stairs, and used a lighted cigarette against her eyelid. Her son Joseph and neighbor David Brown supplied additional testimony, while the petition emphasized that the alleged knife was not introduced into evidence and that no medical or forensic evidence conclusively linked Grimaldo to the weapon.

Procedural history

Gilbert Grimaldo was indicted in Tarrant County cause number 1243882D for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, with a repeat-offender allegation based on a prior murder conviction. A jury convicted him, he pleaded true to the enhancement, and the trial court sentenced him to sixty years' imprisonment. The Second District Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. Grimaldo then filed this pro se petition for discretionary review, challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence, the deadly-weapon finding, and alleged violations involving defense witnesses and exculpatory evidence.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…