## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS
N O . A P - 76, 291

EX PA R TE JUA N M A N U EL C H A V EZ , A ppl i c ant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A W RI T OF HABE AS CORP US CAUS E N O. 6 3 9 0 9 3 I N T HE 1 7 4 TH DI S TR I CT COURT

FROM HA RRI S CO UNTY

K EASLE R , J. , del i vere d t he opi ni on of t he C ourt i n w hi ch K ELL ER , P .J ., M E YE RS , P RI CE , J OHNS ON , H ERVEY , H OL C OM B , and C OCHRAN , J J ., jo in e d . W OMACK , J ., di s s e nt e d.
O P I N I O N Ju an M an u el C h av ez see k s h ab ea s c o rp u s re li ef , claim ing that a S tat e w itn ess’s t es t i mon y
— t h a ta n u n k n o wn h a i rf o u n d whe r e t h e v i c t i m w a s s e x u a l l ya s s a u l t e d was
cons i s t entw i t h hi s know n head- hai rs ampl e— i s fal s e bas ed on r ece ntD N A t es t i ng excl udi ng hi m as t he s our ce of

t he hai r . C ont r aryt o t he tr i al j udge’ s fi ndi ngs and conc l us i ons , w e fi nd

n o d u e p ro c e s s v io la tio n a n d d e n yre lie f
. Backg r oundCHAVEZ—2

O n M ay12, 1992, L i l i a M ar t i nez w al ked fr om her apart m ent i n Sout hw es tH ous t on t o a nea rbyA ppl e T r ee gr ocery s t or e. She obs er ved a man w al ki ng on t he oppos i t e s i de of t he s t r eetbuti n t he s ame di r ect i on. M ar t i nez ent er ed A ppl e Tre e, pur chas ed s om e frui tand a moneyor derand l eftt he s t or e. A s s he began t o w al k back home, s he not i ced the s ame m an
s t andi ng i n t he cornerof t he A ppl e Tre e parki ng l o t. T h e m an appr oache d M ar t i nez a nd offe r ed t o carr yherbags
. She decl i ned, but t he m an w as per s i s t ent ; he fol l ow ed herand kept t al ki ng t o her , m aki ng s om e sexua l l y - expl i ci t comm ent s . W hen theyr eac hed herapart m ent bu i l ding, he fo l l ow e d h e r up a setof st ai rs w hil e con t i nu i ng t o o ffer t o carr yher bag s. A l t hough t he man w as w ear i ng dar k s ungl as s es , M ar t i nez gota good l ook athi s fac e. T he man fol l ow ed M ar t i nez a nd w as t w o uni t s fr om M arti nez’ s apart m entw hen M arti n ez w enti ns i de. She i m m edi at el yl ocked the door , putherbags dow n, and l ooked th ro u g h h e r w in d o w . M a rtin e z sa w th e m a n sta n d in g n e a r he r a p a rtm e n t d o o r. S h e w e n t to t he ki t chen, putt he frui ti n herr efr i ger ator, and t hen w entback t o t he w i ndow and l ooked

o u t ag a in . S h e d id n o t se e th e m a n . M a rtin e z w e n t to th e b u ild in g ’s o f f ice a n d p a id h e r re n t. B eca us e the man appear ed t o be gone, s he thoughtt hatt he coa s tw as cl earand l eftherdoor unl ocked. W hen s he r etur ned to h er apar t m ent , s he l ocked the doorbehi nd her
. A s s he ent er ed herbedr oom , t he man w ho fol l ow ed her hom e s t epped outof hercl os et
. M ar t i nez
s cr eamed and r an, but befor e she coul d getoutof herapart m ent , t he man knocked hert o t he flo o r. W hi l e M ar t i nez w as on t he fl oor , t he m an cover ed her m out h w i t h h is ha n d , p u l l edCHAVEZ—3

a gun fr om hi s w ai s tband, poi nt ed i t at her head, and t ol d her t o s hut up orhe w oul d “bl ow [her ] aw ay . ” W i t h t he gun i n hi s l eft hand, t he man undr es s ed M ar t i nez w i t h hi s r i ghthand. A s M ar t i nez w as l ay i ng on her back, t he m an for ced her t o pr eform or al s ex on hi m . D ur i ng al l of t hi s , even though t he man w as s t i l l w ear i ng s ungl as s es , M ar t i nez w as cl os e t o hi m and abl e t o geta cl earl ook athi m . N ext , t he man st ood M ar t i nez up a nd w al ked heri nt o t he bedr oom . A tt hi s t i m e, he w as cover i ng herm out h w i t h hi s hand, and s he w as abl e t o s ee a
w or n off, bl ui s h t at t oo nearhi s w r i s t
. O nce i n the bedr oom , t he man anal l ys odom i zed M ar t i nez. W hen the man w as fi ni s hed, h e w an t ed t o cl ean hi m s el f w i t h t he beds pr ead. M ar t i nez pl eade d for hi m not t o, s o he us ed t oi l etpaperi ns t ead. M ar t i nez t es t i fi ed thats he

s aw bl ood on hi s peni s . T he man t ook a t ow el fr om t he bathr oom and us ed i tt o cl ean the d o o rk n o b s . T h e m a n th e n le f t. L at ert hatday , M arti n ez tol d a fr i end w hathappene d. T he fr i end, M ar t a I barr a, per s uaded M ar t i nez t o not i fy t he pol i ce. A n ambul ance arr i ved and t r ans por t ed hert o B en T au b H o sp it al. M arti n ez u n d erw en t a fu ll ra p e e x a m ination an d sp o k e to a p o li ce o ff icer. T he nurs es and doct or s w ho pr eform ed the exa m concl uded thatM ar t i nez e xhi bi t ed s i gns in d ic a tin g th a t s h e h a d in f a c t b e e n ra p e d
. L es s t han tw enty - four hour s aft ert he as s aul t , O ffi cerK ei t h W ebb, a mem berof t he H ous t on Pol i ce D epart m ent ’ s ( H PD ) C r i m e Scene U ni t , conduct ed the pr i m aryi nves t i gat i on
o f M arti n ez ’s ap artm en t. O ff icer W eb b start ed b ytakin g p h o to g ra p h s o f M arti n ez ’s apart m ent
. H e not i ced a s t ai n on t he beds pr ead, w her e t he s econd a s s aul thad t aken pl ace .CHAVEZ—4

H e p roc esse d the b ed sp rea d an d m o v ed o n to th e sou thw est are a o f th e li v ing roo m , w h ere M ar t i nez w as fi r s t as s aul t ed. O ffi cer W ebb used m ul t i pl e t ape l i ft s t o gathert r ace evi dence l i ke hai rand fi ber s . W hen he s tuck t he t ape t o t he fl oorand pul l ed i tup, t he t ape pi cked up t r ace evi dence , buthe per for m ed no actual i ns pect i on of i t
. O ffi cerW ebb forw ar ded the t ape l i ft s foranal y s i s bya cr i m i nal i s tatt he H PD cr i m e l ab. In th e f e w d a y s a f

ter th e a ss a u lt, M a rtin e z in sp e c ted a p h o to a rra yth a t d id n o t co n tain a phot ogr aph of Chavez; M ar t i nez di d not m ake an i dent i fi cat i on fr om t he arr ay . L es s t han

one m ont h aft er t he as s aul t , Ser geant A ngel i of t he H ous t on Pol i ce D epart m ent as ked M ar t i nez t o des cr i be heras s ai l antt o a s ket ch ar ti st
. B eca us e M ar t i nez’ s as s ai l antw as
we a r i n g d a r k s u n g l a s s e s d u r i n g t h e a s s a u l t , t h e s k e t c h a r t i s twa s f o r c e d t o d r a w i n h e ro wn
ver s i on of t he as s ai l ant ’ s ey es . T he des cr i pt i on M ar t i nez ga ve t o t he s ket ch art i s tdi d, how ever , i ncl ude a thi n s caron t he man’ s r i ghtchee k, w hi ch w as l at erdet ermi ned t o be

cons i s t entw i t h a s caron C havez ’ s r i ghtchee k. M ar t inez als o des cr i bed heras s ai l antas havi ng “cur l yhai r , ” a de s cr i pt i on s he t es t i fi ed t o at tr ial
. In June 1992, a mont h aft erher

as s aul t , M ar t i nez w as s how n a s econd phot o arr ay . T hi s arr aydi d notcont ai n a phot ogr aph

o f C h a v e z , a n d M a rt in e z d id n o t m a k e a n id e n tif ic a tio n f ro m th is a rr a y . M a rtin e z sa w h e r a ss a ilan t in p u b lic o n tw o o c c a sio n s. F irst, in e a rlyJu n e 1 9 9 2 , w h ile M ar t i nez a nd I barr a w er e r i di ng a ci t ybus , M ar t i nez r ecogni zed a pas s engeras t he man w ho

as s aul t ed her
. B ot h w o m en n o ti ced t he man at t empt i ng t o hi de hi m s el f behi nd t w o ot her pas s enger s. M arti n ez sa w hi m a s econd t i m e on J une 19, 1992, w hi l e s hoppi ng w i t h herCHAVEZ—5

br ot herand I barr a i n a Fi es t a M ar t
. T he m an w al ked by M ar t i nez and tur ned t o l ook ather tw ice. M arti n ez sign aled Iba rra, an d Iba rra im m ed iat elyfo u n d an o f f -d u typ o li ce o ff

icer, O ffi cerG oode, w ho w as m oonl i ght i ng as a F i es t a s ecur i t yguar d. A tt he s ame t i m e, M ar t i nez found another Fi es t a s ecur i t y guar d and t ol d hi m w hatw as goi ng on. T he s ecur i t yguar d t hat M ar t i nez al er t ed t es t i fi ed t hatt he man poi nt ed outt o hi m w as act i ng odd and appe ar ed t o be i n a hurr y . A s s oon as t he man w al ked out o f the stor e, O ffi cerG oode as ked hi m t o s t op. H e s t opped, and O ffi cerG oode t ook hi m i nt o cus t ody
. O ffi cerG ood i dent i fi ed the man as J u a n M a n u e l C h a v e z . I n m i d- A ugus t1992, M ar t i n ez vi ew ed a l i ve l i neup and i m m edi at el yi dent i fi ed C havez as heras s ai l ant
. C havez w as t hen ch ar ged w i t h t w o count s of aggr avat ed s exual

a s s a u lt. D ur i ng t r i al , t he St at e and Chavez’ s at t or neybot h poi nt ed outt he s cart hatM ar t i nez
s aw on her as s ai l ant ’ s fac e— and M ar t i nez agai n confi r m ed s eei ng i tdur i ng heras s aul t
. A nd

w h e n th e p ro s e c u to r a s k e d M a rt in e z w h o a s s a u lte d h e r, s h e id e n tif ie d C h a v e z . D ebor ah Li nd, an H P D cr i m i nal i s tw ho had exa m i ned the t ape l i ft s gather ed by O ffi cerW ebb, t es t i fi ed aboutherexami nat i on: Q
. A tm yr eques t , di d y ou exami ne s om e hai r s fort hi s par t i cul arcas e? A
. Y es , I di d. Q
. A nd w hat l ab n um ber di d y ou assi gn t hat, y ou r anal y si s? A
. T he l ab number t hatw as as s i gned t o thi s cas e i s L 92- 8576. Q . N o w , let m e sh o w y o u w h a t’s b e e n m a rk e d a s S tate ’s E x h ib it N o . 3 2 . D id y ou r etr i eve thes e t ape l i ft s t h at w ere s ubm i t t ed t o t he [e vi dence ] r oom by o f f ice r W e b b a t m yre q u e st? A
. Y es , I di d.CHAVEZ—6

Q
. A nd l etm e s how y ou w hat ’ s been mar ked as St at e’ s E xhi bi tN o. 33 and N o. 34. A r e t hos e pul l ed head hai r s fr om t he defe ndant i n t hi s cas e, J uan C havez ? A
. Pul l ed hea d and pul l ed pubi c. Q
. A l l r i ght
. N ow , aft er y ou r etr i eved the cont ent s of St at e’ s E xhi bi tN o. 32, w h ich a re th e tap e lifts w ith th e v a rio u s f ib e rs a n d h a irs a ttac h e d to it, w h a t d id y ou do w i t h those t ape li ft s? A
. A ft ert hi s w as r ece i ved, I then r emoved t he hai r s fr om t he t ape l i ft s and I c o mp a r e d t h e s e h a i r s wi t h t h e k n o wn h a i r s o f M r . Ch a v e z a n d t o t h e k n o wn h a ir s o f th e c o m p la in a n t. Q
. O kay
. N ow , w hen y ou s ayy ou r emoved t he hai r s fr om t he t ape l i ft s , w hat is th e f irst th in g y o u d id w ith th o se h a irs th a t you re m o v e d f ro m th e tap e lift? A
. W el l , aft erI r emoved t hem from t he t ape l i ft , I exami ned them and I l ooked a t th e m u n d e r a s te re o m ic ro s c o p e , w h ic h , in e s s e n c e , m a g n if ie s th e m . Q . D id y o u m o u n t th e m o n a n yp a rticu lar slid e o r a n y th in g lik e th a t? A
. Y es . T he nextpr oces s aft erexami ni ng t hem, y o u w o u l d m ountt hem on sli d es. T h ey ’re a larg er typ e sli d e tha n the n o rm al typ e m icrosc o p e sli d e, m o re of a r ect angul ars hape. W e cal l t hem hai rs l i des and they ’ r e mount ed and then I can l ook att hem under a compar i s on s cope. Q . D id y o u m o u n t th e k n o w n h a irs f ro m th e d e f

e n d a n t as w e ll? A
. Y es , I di d. Q
. Is t hat bot h the head hair s and the pu bic hai rs ? A . Y e s , I d id
. Q . Is th e re a v isib le d if

f e re n c e th a t you c a n tell b e tw e e n h e a d h a irs a n d p u b ic hair s? A
. U sual l y , y es, t here i s. Q
. O k ay . In th is pa rt icular c ase , co u ld y o u d ist ing u ish b etw ee n the h ea d h airs and t he p ub i c hair s? A
. Y es , I coul d. Q
. N ow , y ou s ai d t haty ou compar ed them. O ry ou compar ed the hai r s t hat y ou t ook fr om t he t ape l i ft s and t he def endant ’ s hai r s . W hatexac t l yw er e y ou l o o k i n g f o rwh e n y o u c o mp a r e t h e m? A
. A l l r i ght
. I exami ned M r . C havez ’ s head and pubi c hai rand I exami ned, of cour s e, t he hai r s fr om t he evi dent i al t ape. W hat y ou l ook at ar e cha r act er i s t i cs t hat ar e si m i l ar , bot h t hat ar e found i n t he hai r s fr om t he defenda nt and i n t he hai r s t hat w ere fo u n d on t he t ape l i ft s . A tt he s ame t i m e, t hough, I am al s o, d u rin g th is p ro c e ss , I m u st c o m p a re th e h a irs to th e c o m p lain a n t’s h a irs in order t o d o a co m plet e com parat i ve an al y si s. Q
. O kay
. W er e y ou abl e t o el i m i nat e s om e hai r s t hatw er e found on the t ape l i ftas bei ng M r. C hav ez’s ? A
. T her e w er e hai r s on t he t ape l i ft s t hatw er e notM r . C havez ’ s ; t hi s i s t rue.CHAVEZ—7

Q
. Y ou can t el l t hatfors ur e byy ourexami nat i on? A
. Y es. Q
. N ow , di d y ou fi nd anyhai r s t hat w er e cons i s t ent , any hai r s on t he t ape l i ft t hatw er e cons i s t entw i t h t he know n hai rfr om M r . C havez ? A
. Y es , I di d. Q
. A nd can y ou exp l ai n y ou r fi nd i ng s? A
. Y es . I found one he ad hai ron t he t ape l i ft s t hatw as co n sist en tw i t h t he k n o w n h e a d h a irs a m p le o f J u a n C h a v e z . Q
. A nd can y ou expl ai n w haty ou m ean – – w hat i s i tt haty ou l ooked att hat m ade y ou r eac h y ourconcl us i on? A
. W el l , w hen y ou exam i ne h ai rs , i t ’s a sl ow , t edious, l on g p rocess becau se y ou have t o l ook at , fr om t he r oot , t o t he t i p of al l t he hai r s . Y ou exami ne the sp e c tru m o f th e h a irs rec e iv e d f ro m th e d e f

e n d a n t a n d f

ro m th e c o m p lain a n t. S o , y o u h av e to s tud ytheir ha irsep ara tel y . T h en y o u m u st stu d ythe h airs f o u n d o n th e e v id e n c e , su c h a s th e tap e lift. T h e n w h e n I fin d tw o h a irs th a t, fi r s toff, t heyhave t o be fr om t he s ame type of body ar ea, w hi ch i s t he hea d, i n t h i s c a s e . I l o o k , a r e t h e y f r o m th e s a me r a c e o r s i mi l a r r aci al c h a ra c ter istics , w h ich th e yw e re . T h e n I lo o k a t co lo r, th e len g th , w h a t th e tip l ooked l i ke and I l oo k ed at the var i ous anat om i cal fea tur es of t he hai r s and compar e t hes e fe atur es and come t o s om e conc l us i on. Q
. W hatanat om i cal fea tur es w er e y ou l ooki ng ati n t hi s par t i cul arcas e? A
. W el l , al l hai r s have the s ame t ype of anat om i cal fea tur es i n t he s ens e that th e re a re th re e p a rt s o f

a h a ir
. Q
. W hatar e t hos e? A
. T he thr ee par t s of a ha i r , t her e i s t he cort ex, w hi ch i s t he out erl ay erof t he hai r . T he i nnerl ay er , next t o t hat , i s cal l ed – – excus e m e. I s t he cut i cl e i s t he out erl ay er . T he i nner l ay erof t hati s t he cort ex w her e the pi gm enti s found. T he i nnerar ea of

t hat is t he medul l a, w hi ch i s m or e l i ke an a i rt ype s ack running t he co urse of t he h ai r. Y ou cou l d t hink of a hairi n tw o d i fferent w ay s. E i t hery ou coul d t hi nk of a penci l w her e the y el l ow cover i ng on t he out s i de of t he penc i l i s t he cut i cl e and the w o o d en p o rou s par ti s t he pi gm entand the bl ack gr aphi t e run n ing thr ough t he cor e of i ti s t he medul l a. O rundert he m i cr os cope, i t l ooks r eal l y m or e l i ke a r oad w her e the cut i cl e i s t he s houl der of t he r oad an d the pave m ent , t he bl ack pa vement i s t he cort ex w i t h t he pi gm entand the w ave – – the pave m entm ar ker s t hatdi vi de the r oad i nt o l anes i s y ourm edul l a. Q
. N ow , w hen y ou compar ed the hai rt haty ou found on t he tr ace – – I m ean, on t he t ape l i ft t o M r . C havez ’ s hai r , t he hai rt haty ou s ai d w as cons i s t ent , w hat exac t l yw as cons i s t ent ? W hatw er e the s ame i n t he t w o hai r s t hat y ou l ooked a t?CHAVEZ—8

A
. W el l , t her e w as m an yt hi ngs t hatw er e cons i s t ent
. T he l ength w as i n t he sa m e a re a a s h is. T h e c o lo rin g o f th e u n k n o w n h a ir a n d M r. C h a v e z ’s h a ir w er e ver y , very cl os e. T he col or pat t ern, t he w ayt he pi gm entw as di s t r i but ed dow n t he root t o t he shaf t , t o t he t i p of t he hai rw as verys i m i l ar . T he di amet er of t he hai rw as verys i m i l ar . T he am ount of cut i cl e, t he si ze of t he cut i cl e, t he col orof t he cut i cl e w as very s i m i l ar . I l ooked att ype of c ol or i ng di s t r i but i on, s om et i m es i n s om e of pe opl es ’ hai rs t her e’ s l i ke a pa t chyt ype col or i ng d is tr ib u tio n a n d th is w a s s im ila r i n M r. C h a v e z ’s h a ir
. Q . Is th a t th e p ig m e n t th a t y o u ’re talk in g a b o u t? A . Y e s , y e s , it is
. Q
. O k ay . W h at ab o u t th e h air c o lo r v ariati o n , the s h ad ing o f th e h air co lor? W a s th a t sim ilar a s w e ll? A
. Y es. T he co l ori ng w as veryi m po rt ant and si m i l ar t o M r. C hav ez’s
. Q . O k a y . A n d th e d e n sityo f th e p ig m e n t? D id y o u c o m p a re th a t? A
. Y es. T h es e ar e al l natur al l yexami ned undert he compar i s on s cope a nd w e’re loo k ing at t h e h a ir s s id e b yside an d m o v ing the s tage s so that y o u ’re l ooki ng atbot h hai r s att he s ame t i m e, t he unknow n hai r on one st age a nd t he know n hai r s on t he other
. A nd s o, t her efor e, y ou can s tudy t he hai r s t ogether as y ou’ r e exa m i ni ng t he col or , as I ’ ve s ai d, and the cut i cl e, t he cort ex and the m e d u lla
. Q
. N ow , di d y ou obs er ve a r ooton t he hai rt hatw as gi ven t o y ou on t he t ape lift? A
. Y es . W hen I do anal y s i s , I onl yr eal l ys tudyt hos e hai r s t hathave r oot s . So, th o se a re th e o n e s th a t I m a in lym e n tio n e d in m yre p o rt. Q
. W as t here suffi ci ent am ou nt of r oo tt o p erform a D N A analy si s? A . N o , the re w a s n o t. Q
. W hati s y our concl us i on as t o t he hai r t hat w as found on t he t ape l i ftand – – i n compar i s on t o t he hai r , know n s ampl e of ha i rfr om M r . C havez ? A
. T he unknow n hai rw as cons i s t entw i t h t he know n head ha i rs ampl e of J uan C h a v e z .
O n cr os s - exami nat i on, t he fol l ow i ng excha nge betw een Chavez’ s at t orneyand L i nd t ook pl ace : A
. A r e y ou s ay i ng can I i dent i fyt hatthi s i s M r. C h av ez ’ s hai rt hat ’ s on t he tape li ft? Is t h at w h at y o u ’re ask ing m e, si r? Q. Ye s , ma ’ a m. A . N o , I c a n n o t id e n tif

yit a s M r. C h a v e z ’s h a ir
.CHAVEZ—9

Q
. In f ac t, itw o u ld b e q u it e p o ssible that fo lks o f the sam e ra ce w o u ld sh are charact eri st i cs on thei r head sam ples – – hairsam ples ? A
. Y es, si r. D u rin g su m m a tio n th e p ro se c u to r e m p h a siz e d L in d ’s te stim o n yb ysa y in g th e h a ir found i n M ar t i nez’ s apart m ent“mat ched orw as cons i s t entw i t h” C havez ’ s hai r. T he pr os ecut oral s o emphasi zed M ar t i nez’ s t es t i m onyt hatheras s a i l a n th a d “ cur l yhai r ” w hen s he said , “Y o u ca n ch an g e the cu t of y o u r h air. Y o u ca n m ak e y o u r ha irstr aigh t. B u t y o u ca n ’t

c h a n g e th e in s id e o f

y o u r h a ir .” C havez pr es ent ed an a l i bi
. A ccor di ng t o hi s t es t i m ony , dur i ng t he ent i r e as s aul t , he

w a s e ith e r a t h is o r a f rie n d ’s a p a rtm e n t, sc h o o l, a re sta u ra n t, or p layi n g v o lleyb a ll i n P a sa d ena. H e accou nted for m ore t han al l of the r el evan t t i m e peri od s, from 2:00 a. m . to

n e a rly1 0 :0 0 p .m ., o n th e d a yM a rtin e z w a s a ss a u lted . A n d h e h a d f iv e w itn e ss e s te stif

yin

s uppor t of hi s al i bi
. H e al s o m ade s t at ement s conce r ni ng hi s al i bi t o Ser geantA ngel i dur i ng th e liv e lin e u p a n d to T e re sa F a rf a n , a n e w s re p o rte r w h o in ter v iew e d h im sh o rtlyb e f o re h is trial. D u rin g c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n , w h e n th e p ro se c u to r a sk e d a b o u t th e b lu ish ta tto o o n h is

w r i s t , C havez deni ed ever havi ng one. H ow ever , he di d have a s car w her e M ar t i nez s aw t he ta tto o , a n d th e re c o rd re f le c ts th a t th is s c a r w a s s h o w n to th e ju ry. R ej ect i ng M ar t i nez’ s al i bi

- d ef ens e, t he j ur yfound C havez gui l t yof t w o count s of aggr avat ed s exual as s aul tand s ent ence d hi m to thir t y - fi ve y ear s ’ i m pr i s onm entforeac hCHAVEZ—10

C h a v ez v . S ta te , N o. 01- 93- 00350- C R , 1994 T ex. A pp. L E X I S 225 ( T ex. 1 A p p . — H o u ston [1 st D ist
. ] 19 9 4 ). C h a v e z v . S ta te , N o. 01- 06- 00357- C R , 2007 T ex. A pp. L E X I S 9947 ( T ex. 2 A p p . — H o u ston [1 st D ist
. ] 20 0 7 ). count
. I n an unpubl i s hed opi ni on, t he F i r s t C our t of A ppeal s aff i r m ed C havez ’ s convi ct i on. 1 A ppl i c ant ’ s Pos t - C onv i c t i on M ot i ons f or D N A Tes t i ng I n F e b ru a r y 2 0 0 6 , Ch a v e z f i l e d a mo t i o n f

o rf o r e n s i c DNA t e s t i n g o f t h e u n k n o wn hai rt hatL i nd t es t i fi ed aboutatC havez ’ s t r i al
. T he tri al ju d ge deni ed the mot i on, and the Fi r s t C our t of A ppeal s aff i r m ed t he deni al
. I n D ece m ber 2007, C havez fi l ed a second 2

m o tio n f o r f o re n sic D N A tes tin g . T h is tim e th e S tate a g re e d th a t C h a v e z w a s e n tit led to tes tin g . T h e h a ir w a s s u b jec ted to D N A tes tin g , an d th e re su lts e x c lu d e d C h a v e z a s its

s o u rc e . H abeas P roce edi ngs A f ter re c e iv in g th e D N A tes t re su lts, in 2 0 0 9 , C h a v e z f iled a n a p p lica tio n f

o r a w rit of h abeas co rpus. H e al l eged , am on g o t her t hings, t hat he i s ent i t l ed to a new t ri al becau se t he St at e pr es ent ed fa l s e t es t i m o n y w h en L i nd t es t i fi ed thatt he unknow n hai rfound at M ar t i nez’ s apart m entm at ched hi s know n hai r . T he habe as j udge hel d a hear i ng and adopt ed C h a v e z ’s p ro p o se d f

in d in g s o f

f a c t an d c o n c lu sio n s o f

law , w h ich sta te, in re lev a n t p a rt:

• O n M ay1 2 , 1 9 9 2 , M arti n ez w as f o ll o w ed h o m e f

ro m a g ro ce rystore bya m an w eari ng sung l asses .

• W hen M art i nez r etur ned, t he man, s t i l l w ear i ng s ungl as s es , emer ged f r o m t h e c l o s e ta n d s e x u a l l y a s s a u l t e d h e ro r a l l y a n d a n a l l y.CHAVEZ—11

• P o li ce o ff

icers co ll ec ted ha ir s fro m the area o f t h e floo r i n M arti n ez ’s apart m entw her e t he as s aul thappene d.

• M a r ti n e z w a s ta k e n to a h o sp ital f o r a se x u a l-a ss a u lt ex a m in a tio n in w h ich o ral an d an al sw ab s, an d loo se h ea d an d p u b ic ha ir , w ere c o lle c te d f

ro m h e r b o d y .

• M a r t i n e z t o l d t h e h o s p i t a l s t a f f t h a t , p r i o rt o he r a s s a ul t , t h e l a s tt i me s he had s exual r el at i ons w as i n D ece m ber1991.

• M ar t i nez s aw C havez , w hom s he bel i eved t o be her assa il ant , i n a g roc erystore o n Ju ly1 9 , 1 9 9 2 , an d a po li ce o ff icer w o rkin g in the store arr es t ed C havez
.

• H P D c rim in a list D e b o ra h L in d tes tifie d th a t sh e m icr o sc o p ica lly ex am ined the h airs fo u n d at M arti n ez ’s ap artm en t, that o n e o f th e h airs w as verys i m i l ar to C havez ’ s i n di amet er , col or , col orpat t ern, and p igm en t, an d that the len g th o f th at h air w as th e sa m e a s C h av ez ’s ha ir
.

• C havez t es t i fi ed att r i al and pr es ent ed an a l i bi defe ns e.

• T h e S tat e a rgu ed d u ri n g su m m ati o n that the h a ir f o u n d in M arti n ez ’s ap artm en t m atch ed C h av ez ’s ha ir
.

• D ur i ng s um m at i on, t he St at e arg u ed t hatC havez , i n pr epar at i on for tr ia l, c o u ld c h a n g e th e le n g th a n d c u t o f h is h a ir , b u t n o t its c o n te n ts
.

• M ito c h o n d ria l D N A (m tD N A ) te stin g w a s n o t av a ilab le a t trial.

• T he St at e ul t i m at el yagr eed t o m t D N A t es t i ng of t he hai ri n ques t i on.

• T he r es ul t s of t he mt D N A t es t i ng excl uded C havez as t he s our ce of t he h air.

• D ue to t he new l yavai l abl e D N A evi dence excl udi ng C havez as t he so u rc e o f th e h a ir, h e is e n tit led to a n e w trial.

• C havez w as convi ct ed and s ent ence d t o t hi r ty - fi ve y ear s ’ i n pr i s on b ase d o n the S tat e’s a rgu m en t th at he w as th e so u rce o f th e h air.CHAVEZ—12

3 0 0 S
. W
. 3 d 7 6 8 , 7 7 2 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 9 ). 3 E x par t e Van A l

s t yne , 2 3 9 S
. W
. 3 d 8 1 5 , 8 1 7 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ). 4 I d. 5 • B utforL i nd’ s t es t i m onysu p p o rt i ng t he St at e’ s ar gum ent , and the S tate ’s s u m m a tio n , th e re is a re a so n a b le p ro b a b ili ty th a t th e ju ryw o u ld have a cqui t t ed C havez
. B a s e d o n th e s e f

in d in g s , th e h a b e a s ju d g e re c o m m e n d s g ra n tin g re lie f
. C hav ez con t end s t hat L in d ’s test i m on yi s fal se. H e argues t hat this use of fal se tes tim o n y e licite d f

ro m L in d , a n d e m p h a siz e d d u rin g th e S tate ’s su m m a tio n , e n tit les h im to

r el i ef. W e fi l ed and s ett hi s cas e t o determ ine w hethert he St at e pr es ent ed fa l s e t es t i m ony and, i f s o, w hetherC havez i s ent i t l ed t o r el i ef ba s ed on ouropi ni on i n E x par t e C habot , in

w hi ch w e h eld tha tdue pr oces s i s vi ol at ed w hen the St at e unknow i ngl ypr es ent s per j ur ed tes tim o n ya t trial. 3 A n a ly sis A t r i al j udge has a uni que opp o r tuni t yt o obs er ve w i t nes s demeanorfi r s t - hand and th e re f o re h a s th e b e st v a n tag e p o in t to a ss e ss w itn e ss c re d ib ili ty
. A c c o rd in g ly , w e o rd in a rily 4

acc epta tr i al j udge’ s fi ndi ngs of fa ctand conc l us i ons of l aw . B ut 5 [w ] hen ouri ndepende ntr evi ew of t he re cor d r evea l s fi ndi ngs and conc l us i ons t hatar e uns uppor t ed byt he r ecor d, w e w i l l , under s t andabl y , become s kept i cal as t o t he rel i abil i tyof the fi nd i ng s and co nclusi on s as a w ho l e. In such cases, w e w ill p ro c e e d c a u tio u slyw ith a v iew to w a rd e x e rc isin g o u r o w n ju d g m e n t. A nd w hen w e dee m i tnece s s ary , w e w i l l ent er al t ernat i ve orcontr aryfi ndi ngs and conc l us i ons t hat the r ecor d s uppor t s . Fur t herm or e, w hen w e det er m i ne that the tri al ju d g e’s fin d ing s an d co n clus ion s that are su p p o rt ed b ythe re co rd r equi r e cl ar i fi cat i on ors uppl ement at i on, w e may exer ci s e ourj udgm entandCHAVEZ—13

E x part e Reed , 271 S. W
. 3d 698, 727 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 2008) ( ci t i ng E x par t e Y oung , 6 4 1 8 S .W .2 d 8 2 4 , 8 2 9 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 1 9 6 7 ); E x p a r t e A da ms , 768 S. W
. 2d 281, 288 ( T ex. C rim . A p p . 1 9 8 9 ); E

x par t e Van A l

s t yne , 239 S. W
. 3d 815, 817 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 2007) ( per c u ri a m ))
. E x par t e C habot , 300 S. W
. 3d 768, 771 ( quot i ng E x pa rt e F i erro , 934 S. W
. 2d 370, 7 3 7 4 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 6 )). B L ACK ’ S L AW D I CTI ONARY 1485–86 (7th ed
. 1 9 9 9 ). 8 See B er gerv. U ni t ed Stat es , 2 9 5 U
. S
. 7 8 , 8 8 (19 3 5 ). 9 N apper , 2010 T ex. C r i m . A pp. L E X I S 1209, at*111. 10 U ni t ed Stat es v. Tavar es , 9 3 F
. 3 d 1 0 , 1 4 (1st C ir
. 1 9 9 6 ). 11 m ak e f ind ing s an d co n clus ion s tha t the rec o rd su p p o rt s an d that are n ec essa ry t o ouri ndepende ntr evi ew and ul t i m at e di s pos i t i on. 6 I n C habot , w e hel d t hatt he St at e’ s unknow i ng us e of pe r j ur ed t es t i m ony“i s a t r i al

err or t hat i s s ubj ect t o a harm l es s er r oranal y s i s , ” and “ ‘ t he appl i canthas t he bur den t o pr ove bya pr eponder ance of t he evi dence t hat the erro r contr i but ed t o hi s convi ct i on or pu nis hm ent. ’” “ T e stim o n y that i s untrue” is on e of m anyw ay s j uri st s defi ne fa l se 7
t es t i m ony . T he Supr eme Courthas i ndi cat ed that“i m pr opers ugges t i ons , i ns i nuat i ons and,

8

es peci al l y , as s er t i ons of per s onal know l edge” cons t i tut e f alse t es t i m ony . R ece nt l y , att he 9 b e g in n in g o f

th is te rm , w e lo o k e d a t th e v a rio u s d e f in iti o n s o f

p e rju ry : T h e F irst C irc u it

10 des cr i bed per

j ur yas “t he w i l l ful i nt entt o pr ovi de fal s e t es t i m ony , r ather t han as a r es ul tof

con fusi on , m i st ake, or faulty m em ory . ” A nd t he Fifth C i rcui t fou nd t hat w i t ness r espon se 11
t o ques t i oni ng pl ay s a l ar ge r ol e i n det er m i ni ng w hetherper j ur yhas been c om m i t t ed w hen i t s t at ed t hat “[t ] he A gent s di d not candi dl y r es pond t o t he defens e counse l ’ s ques t i ons , andCHAVEZ—14

U ni t ed Stat es v. C ar t er , 5 6 6 F
. 2 d 1 2 6 5 , 1 2 7 0 (5th C ir
. 1 9 7 8 ). 12 S e e Nap

per , 2 0 1 0 T ex. C r i m . A pp. L E X I S 1209, at*111–12 ( hol di ng t hateven 13 t hough the H PD cr i m i nal i s tgave i nacc ur at e t es t i m onyr egar di ng hi s s t at i s t i cal fr equenc y esti m ate, w h ich w as b ase d o n h is D N A an aly sis, h e d id n o t com m itp erjury ). See i d. 14 E x par t e C habot , 3 0 0 S
. W
. 3 d 7 6 8 , 7 7 1 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 9 ). 15 th e p ro s e c u tin g a tto rn e yd id n o th in g to c o rr e c t th e A g e n ts ’ e v a s iv e te s tim o n ie s .” 12 R egardl ess of ho w w e define perj ury or fal se t est i m on yi n the con t ext of a du e process vi ol at i on, w e di s agr ee w i t h t he t r i al j udge’ s r ecomm endat i on t o gr ant r el i ef. L ind ’s test im o n y that the ha ir fro m the tap e li ft sh are d sim il ar p h y sical ch ara cterist ics w ith C h av ez ’s k n o w n h a ir h a s n o t b e e n p ro v e n to b e f a lse
. L in d c lea rlysta ted th a t sh e c o u ld n o t p o sitiv e ly 13 i dent i fyt h e u nknow n hai ras C havez ’ s . A ft erexami ni ng t he hai r s fr om t he t ape l i ftunder bot h s t er eo and c om par i s on m i cr os copes , L i nd t es t i fi ed thatt he phy s i cal char act er i s t i cs of t hos e hai r s w er e cons i s t ent w i t h t he phy s i cal char act er i s t i cs of C havez ’ s hai r . She s t at ed that t he l ength, col or i ng pat t er n, pi gm ent di s t r i but i on, and cut i cl es of t he hai r fr om t he t ape l i ft and C hav ez’s kn ow n h ai r s am ple w ere s i m i lar. L i nd ’s t est i m on yi s not fal se j ustbecau se pos t - convi ct i on D N A t es t i ng l at erpr oved thatt he hai rdi d notcome fr om C havez
. T he 14 sim ilaritie s b e tw e e n th e p h y sic a l ch a ra c ter istics o f th e u n k n o w n h a ir a n d C h a v e z ’s h a ir id e n tif ie d b yL in d a t C h a v e z ’s tr ia l h a v e n o t b e e n re f u te d
. F in a lly , ev e n if w e a ss u m e d th a t C h a v e z h a s s h o w n a d u e p ro c e ss v io latio n , w e w o u ld fi nd no h arm . F ir st, t he D N A t es tr es ul t s do notexoner at e C havez
. T hatt he hai ri s not 15CHAVEZ—15

1 1 5 S
. W
. 3 d 1 0 8 , 1 1 0 (T ex . A p p . — T ex ark an a 2 0 0 3 ). 16 Id

. at110–11. 17 Id

. at113. 18 I d. 19 Id

. at113–14. 20 C h a v e z ’s d o e s n o t c o n c lu s iv e ly es ta b lis h th a t h e d id n o t c o m m it th e s e x u a l a s s a u lt. I n J a c o b s v . S ta te , J acobs w as convi ct ed of aggr avat ed s exual as s aul t
. J acobs fi l ed 16 a p o st- co n v ict ion m o ti o n fo r D N A test ing o f tw o h airs f ro m the s ce n e o f th e o ff en se. In 17 the T ex ark an a C o u rto f A p p ea ls, Jac o b s arg u ed that D N A te s ti n g co u ld im p li ca te a third par t yand ther ebyexoner at e hi m . I n aff i r m i ng t he t r i al j udge’ s deni al of D N A t es t i ng, t he 18

co u rt o f a p p ea ls r ea so n ed that ev en if D N A test ing p rov ed that the h airs cam e f rom a third p a rty , itw o u ld sh o w o n ly “ th a t a th ird p a rty h a d , a t s o m e p o in t in tim e (b u t n o t n e c e ss a rily att he t i m e of the cr i m e) , been i ns i de the s l eepe rcompar t m entof t he tr act ort ruck. ” T he 19

c o u rt w e n t o n to n o te th a t h a d th e se x u a l as sa u lt ex a m in a tio n y ield e d b lo o d o r se m in a l f lu id fro m the rap ist , it s co n clus ion m igh t h av e b ee n d iffe ren t, b u t the p rese n ce o f a thir d p arty ’s h a ir o n Ja c o b ’s b e d lin e n s o r clo th in g th a t d o e s n o t b e lo n g to th e v ictim d o e s n o t co n c lu siv e ly pr ove J acob’ s i nnocenc e. 20 Si m i l arr eas oni ng can be appli ed to this cas e. B eca us e the hai rati s s ue ca m e fr om M ar t i nez’ s l i vi ng r oom
— a comm on ar ea ope n t o vi s i t or s
— as oppos ed t o her body , t he fa ct t hati ti s notC havez ’ s s how s onl yt hata thi r d par t ym ayhave be en, ats om e t i m e, t hough notCHAVEZ—16

S e e Mo til la v . S ta te , 78 S. W
. 3d 352, 358–59 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 2002) ( hol di ng t hat 21 t he i m pr operadm is s i on of evi dence ata murde rt r i al w as har m l es s i n l i ghtof s ubs t ant i al e v id e n c e o f

g u ilt ); P rio r v . S ta te , 647 S. W
. 2d 956, 959–60 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 1983) ( fi ndi ng t hat“the err oneous admi s s i on of t he extr aneous offe ns es di d notcontr i but e t o t he fi ndi ng of gui l t y or t o t he puni s hm entas s es s ed” be caus e “the evi dence of gui l tw as overw hel m i ng, even w ith o u t th e e x tra n e o u s o f f e n se s.” ); L itt le v . S ta te , 567 S. W
. 2d 502, 505 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 1978) ( hol di ng t hatt he St at e’ s i m pr oper ar gum ent w as har m l es s err or due t o t he exi s t ence o f o v e rw h e lm in g e v id e n c e o f g u ilt ); P ondext erv. Q uar t er m an , 5 3 7 F
. 3 d 5 1 1 , 5 2 5 (5th C ir
. 2008) ( hol di ng t hat over w hel m i ng evi dence of gui l tpr ecl uded appe l l antfr om es t abl i s hi ng th e p re ju d ice n e c e ss a ryto p re v a il o n h is in e f f e c ti v e a s s ista n c e o f

c o u n se l cla im ); Sayr e v. A nders on , 238 F. 3d 631, 635 ( 5t h C i r . 2001) ( w her e a ha beas pet i t i onercl ai m ed thathi s t r i al coun sel w as inef

fec t i ve fordeny i ng hi m hi s r i ghtt o t es t i fyatt r i al , t he courtfound t hat “[c ] ons i der i ng t he over w hel m i ng evi dence of Sayr e’ s gui l t , w e ca nnotconce i ve of a ny t hi ng Sayr e coul d have s ai d that w o u ld h ave pr ovi ded any r eas onabl e pos s i bi l i t yof a di ffe r ent o u tc o m e .” ). nec e s s a r i l y a t t h e t i me o f t h e a s s a u l t , i n h e r a p a r t me n t b e f o r e t h e t a p e l i f

t s wer e t aken. F u rt h er, th e D N A testresu lt s co u ld n o t exc lud e e ith er of M arti n ez ’s bro thers a s co n tr ibu tors of t he hair
. T hatei t herof M ar t i nez’ s br ot her s , oranotheruni dent i fi ed part y , w er e i n her

a p a rt m e n t d o e s n o t e x o n e ra te C h a v e z . M a r t i n e z ’ s c o n s i s t e n ta n d r e p e a t e d i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s mi l i t a t e a g a i n s ta f i n d i n g o f h a r m. 21 She fi r s ts pot t ed hi m byhappens t ance appr oxi m at el ya mont h aft erheras s aul tw hi l e r i di ng a ci t y bus
. W hen M ar t i nez and Iba r r a boar ded t he bus, C havez w as al r eadyt her e. D ur i ng t he t w o and a hal f t o t hr ee m i l e dr i ve, M ar t i nez not i ced t he man w ho had att acke d her
. She to ld Ib a rr a th a t h e r a s s a ila n t w a s o n th e b u s . Ib a rr a te s tif ie d th a t M a rt in e z “ w a s v e ry a f ra id ,” and that“s he w ant ed .
. . t o gethom e fa s t
. ” I barr a al s o t es t i fi ed thatM ar t i nez t ol d hernot to lo o k a t C h a v e z b e c a u s e “ s h e w a s a f ra id th a t h e s a w u s ,” a n d th a t M a rt in e z w a s “ s h a k in g .” Fur t her , bot h w om en t es t i fi ed t hatC havez w as hi di ng hi m s el f behi nd ot herpas s enger s on t heCHAVEZ—17

C o lella v . S ta te , 915 S. W
. 2d 834, 839 n. 7 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 1995) ( “[w ] e have 22 r epea t edl yhel d t hatfl i ghti s evi dence of a c i r cumst ance fr om w hi ch an i nfer ence of gui l tm ay be dr aw n. ” ( quot i ng Fo ste r v . S ta te , 7 7 9 S .W .2 d 8 4 5 , 8 5 9 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 1 9 8 9 ))); see al so He rn a n d e z v . S ta te , 9 3 9 S .W .2 d 1 7 3 , 1 7 8 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ); V a ld ez v . S ta te , 623 S .W .2 d 3 1 7 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 1 9 8 1 ); H o llo w a y v . S ta te , 525 S. W
. 2d 165 ( T ex. C r i m . A pp. 1 9 7 5 ). bus
. A nd I barr a testi fied t hat“he gotoff the bus r eal fas t
. . . al m os trunni ng t hr ough t he

s t ai r s . ” M ar t i nez s aw C havez a s econd t i m e at t he Fi es t a M ar tw her e C havez w as arr es t ed and t aken i nt o cus t ody
. W hi l e M ar t i nez w as s hoppi ng w i t h Ibarr a, C havez w al ked byherand turn ed to loo k at he r t w ice. M arti n ez an d Iba rra ea ch su m m o n ed a se cu ri tyg u ard
. T h e g u ard t hatM ar t i nez s um m oned t es t i fi ed thatt he man poi nt ed outt o hi m as M ar t inez’ s as s ai l ant “appe ar ed nervous ” and w as act i ng as i f he w ant ed t o l eave Fi es t a “i m m edi at el y . ” O ffi cer G oode, t he s ecur i t yguar d t hatI barr a s um m oned, t es t i fi ed thatas M ar t i nez w at ched Chavez bei ng arr es t ed and t aken i nt o cus t ody , s he w as “cry i ng, ” “pret t yhy s t er i cal , ” and “ s haki ng qui t e a bi t
. ” She eve n “w enti nt o a tr ance - li k e co n d it ion, ” “w as verypal e and l i m p, ” and “l ooked l i ke s he w as m ot i oni ng herm outh, ” but“coul dn’ tgetherm out h open. ” O ffi cer G oode eve ntual l ycal l ed par amedi cs t o t ake c ar e of M ar t i nez. No t a b l y , Ch a v e z ’ s b e h a v i o r
— wh e n e n c o u n t e r e d b yM a r t i n e z f o r tu i t o u s l yo n t wo
o c c a s i o n s
— e v i d e n c e s h i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f M a r t i n e z i n a s s o c i a t i o n t o t h e o f f e n s e . Ea c h t i me 22 C havez w as s pot t ed by M ar t i nez, he exhi bi t ed si gns of bei ng ner vous and att empt ed t o evade M a rt in e z .CHAVEZ—18

M arti n ez also g av e an ac cu rate d esc ri p ti o n o f C h av ez to the sk etch arti st. M arti n ez ’s des cr i pt i on i ncl uded a thi n s caron C havez ’ s r i ght chee k, w hi ch w as not ed befor e t he j ur yby t he pr os ec u tor an d defe ns e couns el atC havez ’ s t r i al
. T he j ur yw as al s o s how n a s caron Ch a v e z ’ s r i g h twr i s t , e x a c t l ywh e r e M a r t i n e z d e s c r i b e d h a v i n g s e e n t h e b l u i s h t a t t o o . At tr ia l, w h e n th e p ro s e c u to r a s k e d M a rt in e z w h o a s s a u lte d h e r, s h e id e n tif ie d C h a v e z . L as t , w hi l e C havez di d pr es entan al i bi , t he j ur ydi d notfi nd it cre d ible. C havez t es t i fi ed thaton t he dayof t he as s aul the w as ats chool , a r es t aur ant , a fr i end’ s apart m ent , and pl ay i ng vol l eybal l i n Pas adena
. M i nut es befor e the l i ve l i neup fr om w hi ch M art i nez i dent i fi ed C havez as heras s ai l ant , C havez t ol d Ser geant A ngel i t hat he w as at s chool on t he dayof t he as s aul t
. B utw hen Ser geantA ngel i as ked C havez w hi ch cam pus , C havez had no

ans w er . Ser geantA ngel i t es t i fi ed that“the conver s at i on fr om t her e on w entki nd of dow nhi l l
. I tw as evas i ve . . . . ” C havez t es t i fi ed that , on t he dayof t he as s aul t , aft erl eavi ng
s chool , he ende d up i n Pas adena pl ay i ng vol l eybal l
. B ut w h en sp eaki ng w i t h Ser geant A ngel i , he fai l ed t o m ent i on anyt hi ng aboutpl ay i ng vol l eybal l
. Y ear s aft ert he i nci dent , as th e ti m e f

o r t ri al ap p roa ch ed , C h av ez w as in terview ed b yT ere sa F arf an , a n ew s rep o rt er. She t esti fied thatw hen s he ques t i oned C havez abouthi s w her eabout s on t he dayof t he

as s aul t , he t ol d her t hat “he and another fr i end w ent out of hi s apart m entt o have s om et hi ng t o ea t a n d t h e n l e a v e t o Pa s a d e n a . ” Fa r f a n c o n t i n u e d , “ He me n t i o n e d s o me t h i ng about H ous t on C om m uni t yC ol l ege butI don’ tr eca l l i f i tw as t hatt i m e. ” C havez har dl ym ent i oned bei ng ats chool on t he day of t he ass aul t , s om ethi ng w hi ch he a nd one of hi s al i bi w i t nes s esCHAVEZ—19

s t r es s ed w hi l e t es t i fy i ng. C havez t ol d t hr ee ve r s i ons abouthi s w her eabout s on t he dayof t he offe ns e. A ddi t i onal l y , al t hough C havez pr es ent ed fi ve w i t nes s es t o corr obor at e hi s al i bi , t he j ur y , as i ndi cat ed byi t s ver di ct , di d not bel i eve t hem. I ndeed, t he tr i al j udge, i n hi s fi ndi ngs of fa ct , di d nots ugges tt hatt he al i bi defe ns e w as cr edi bl e; i ns t ead, he mer el yfound t he

o b vi ous : “C havez t es t i fi ed att r i al and pr es ent ed an a l i bi defe ns e. ” B as ed upon the r eco rd befo re us, a s w el l as t he tr i al j ud ge’s factual fi nd i ng t hat fai l ed to fi nd t he ali bi defense

c re d ib le , w e c o n c lu d e th a t C h a v e z ’s a lib i e v id e n c e is n o t b e lie v a b le
. B ased on t he fo regoi ng , even i f w e ass u m e d t hat C hav ez has sho w n a d ue p rocess
v io la tio n , w e c o n c lu d e h e c a n n o t s h o w h a rm . C oncl usi on C ont r ar yt o t he t r i al j udge’ s fi ndi ngs and conc l us i ons , w e hol d t hatM ar t i nez ha s not
s h o w n a d u e p ro c e s s v io la tio n ; th e re f o re , w e d e n yre lie f
.

D A T E D E L I V E R E D : N ovember 17, 2010 D O N O T PU BL I SH