## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S

O F T E X A S

NO. WR-89, 811-01

Ex P ar te JUSTI N LOPE Z

, Appl icant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A WRIT OF HAB EA S CORP US

CAUSE NO. 09-09- 12750-A I N THE 79 DI STRI CT COURT T H

F ROM JI M WEL LS COUNTY

K E L L E R

, P

. J.

, f

il ed a diss enti ng opin ion in which Y E A R Y

, J.

, joi ned.

T h e Co urt g r an

t s rel i ef o n t h e b as i s o f f

al s e t es t i mo n y f ro m a po l i ce o f

f i cer an d i n ef f ect i v e

as s i s t an ce o f co un s el

. I di s agree b eca us e t h e t es t i

mo n y was n o t f

al s e an d A

ppl i can t h as n o t s h o wn

prej udi ce f

o r h i s i n ef f ect i v e-as s i s t an ce cl ai

m s

.

T h e St at e’ s t h eo ry o f t h e cas e i s t h at t h e v i ct i m was ki l l ed b y A

ppl i can t (Jus t i n L o pez) an d

h i s co -def en dan t (I s m ael Go n zal ez) an d t h at h i s b o dy was l ef t o r b uri ed at a l o cat i o n n ear t h ei r h o m e. 1

A ppl i can t ’ s t h eo ry o n h ab eas i s t h at t h e v i ct i m was ki l l ed b y s o m eo n e el s e i n ro o m ei gh

t at t h e Sun s et

F o r eas e o f ref

eren ce, I wi l l o f

t en ref er t o A ppl i can t as “ L o pez” an d t h e co -def en dan t as 1

“G o nz a l ez.” I s o m et i

m es us e f i rst n am es f o r o t h er i n di v i dual s wh en t h ey s h are a l as t n am e wi t h

s o m eo n e el s e.LOP EZ DI SSENT — 2

M o t el

. T h e h ab eas co urt co n cl uded t h at a po l i ce i

n v es t i gat o r (S ergean

t Dav i d E s pi

n o za) gav e f

al s e

an d m i s l eadi n g t es t i m o n y i n s ay i n g t h a t D N A t e s t r es ul

t s ex cl uded t h e v i ct i

m as t h e s o urce o f

b i o l o gi cal ev i den ce co l l ect ed f ro m t h e m o t el

. T h e h ab eas co urt f urt h er co n cl

uded t h at t h e def

en s e

at t o rn ey s were def

i ci en t i n f ai l i n g t o o b t ai

n t h e DNA t es t resul

t s an d t h at t h e v i ct i

m b ei n g ki l l ed at

t h e Sun s et M o t el was a v i ab l e def en s e t h at t h e def

en s e at t o rn ey s ab an do n ed. F i rst

, I di s agree wi

t h

t h e f i n di n g regardi

n g Sergean

t E s pi n o za. A rev i ew o f t h e reco rd s h o ws t h at t h ere was n o t h i n g f al s e

o r m i s l eadi n g ab o ut h i s t e s t i m o n

y

. Seco n d, t h e ev i den ce s uppo rt i n g t h e h ab eas def

en s e t h eo ry i s

f l i m s y an d ref

ut ed b y DNA an d o t h er e vi d en ce, an d i t do es n o t co m e cl o s e t o un derm i n i n g t h e

ev i den ce s uppo rt i

n g t h e St at e’ s case

, s o I di s agree wi t h t h e co n cl

us i o n t h at t h ere i s a reas o n ab l e

pro b ab i l i t y o f a di f f eren t o ut co m e at t ri al

. T h i

rd, gi v en t h e s t ren gt h o f t h e St at e’ s ev i den ce, I di s agree

wi t h t h e co n cl

us i o n t h at an

y o t h er e rr o rs o f def

en s e co un s el gav e ri s e t o a reas o n ab l e pr o b ab i l i t y o f

a di f f eren t o ut co m e. In s h o rt

, t h e def en s e h as prese n

t ed a t h eo ry o f t h e m

urder t h at a rev i ew o f t h e

t ri al reco rd s h o ws t o b e un t en ab l e.

I

. B ACK GROUND

T h e v i ct i m

, E n ri que Hugh es

, di s appea

red o n No v em

b er 2, 2008. A po l i ce i

n v es t i gat i o n o f t h e

di s appea ran ce l ed t h em t o t wo pro s t i t ut es an d ro o m ei gh

t o f t h e Sun s et M o t el

. But t h e i n v es t i gat i o n

di d n o t pro duce en o ugh ev i den ce t o m ake an y arr es t s an d t h e cas e wen t co l d. In M arch o r A

pri l o f

2009, a Crim e S t o ppers t i p f ro m Ro b ert F ari as caus ed t h e i n v es t i gat i o n t o b e reo pen ed. F ari as l ed

t h e po l i ce t o a wo o ded area wh ere t h e v i ct i m ’ s b o dy h ad b een l ef

t o r b uri ed. A l l t h at remai n ed o f t h e

b o dy were b o n es

, b ut DNA t es t i n g an d co m

pari s o n t o s am

pl es f ro m t h e v i ct i

m ’ s f am i l y m em be r s

s h o wed t h at i

t was n i n et een t ri l l i o n t i

m es mo re l i

kel y t h at t h e b o n es were f

ro m a rel at i

v e l i ke Hugh es

t h an f ro m an un

rel at ed i n di v i dual f ro m t h e so ut h

wes t ern Hi s pan i c po pul at i o n

.LOP EZ DI SSENT — 3

A. St ate’ s Tr ial Evidence

T h e St at e’ s cas e at t ri al was f ai rl y s t rai gh t f o rward. It s t h eo ry was t h at Hugh es was ki dn apped

b y L o pez, Go n zal ez, an d F ari as an d t h at L o pez an d Go n zal es ki l l ed h i m at o r n ear t h e pl ace wh ere

h i s b o dy was ul

t i m at el y f o un d. F ari as t es t i f

i ed t o t h i s at t ri al

. L o pez an d Go n zal ez were b ro t h ers o r

h al f -b ro t h ers wh o l i

v ed i n a t rai l er h o us e o n pro pert y o wn ed b y t h ei r paren t s

. T h e paren

t s an d o t h er

s i b l i n gs l i v ed i n a s eparat e s t ruct ure o n t h e pro pert y

. F ari as l i v ed wi t h t h e paren

t s an d v i ewe d t h e

m o t h er, Gl o ri a L o pez, as a m o t h er f i gure. A cco rdi

n g t o F ari as

, Hugh es h ad cal l ed Gl o ri a, as ked h er

why s he w o ul d n o t an s wer t h e ph o n e, an d t h reat en ed t o cal l h er pro b at i o n o f f i cer an d h av e h er

arr es t ed. T h i s m ade L o pez an gry

, an d L o pez s ai d t h ey wo ul d “ t eac h h i m a l es s o n

. ” F ari as ex

pl ai n ed

t h at t h e v i ct i

m was kn o cked o ut

, t i ed up, pl ace d i n t o t h e b ack o f F ari as ’ s pi ckup t ruck, an d t aken t o

t h e pl ace wh ere h e was ul

t i m at el y ki l l ed. F ari as t es t i f

i ed t h at h e kn o cked t h e v i ct i m o ut at o n e po i

n t

an d dro v e t h e t ruck b ut t h at L o pez an d Go n zal ez were al o n e wi t h t h e v i ct i

m wh en t h e v i ct i

m was

ki l l ed. Ho wev er, F ari as t o l d t h e po l i c e a n um b er o f i n co n s i s t en

t det ai l s ab o ut wh at h appen ed an d

wh o was i

n v o l v ed. A t o n e po i n t

, F ari as i

m pl i cat ed L ero y T ri go as a n a c c o m p l i ce b ut l at er

ackn o wl edged t h at t o b e a l i e. F ari as al s o adm i t t ed t h at h e was a h ab i

t ual m ari j uan a us er an d s t at ed

t h at h e h ad m

ul t i pl e-perso n al i

t y di s o rder wi

t h a sec o n d (b ut b et t er) perso n al i t y n am ed “ F ran k. ”

But t h e St at e’ s t h eo ry o f t h e cas e w a s s u p p o r t e d b y o t h er ev i den ce. L ero y t es t i f i ed t h at

,

aro un d 10:00 o r 10:30 p. m

. o n No v em b er 2, 2008, h e s aw L o pez, Go n zal ez, a n d F ari as dri v e awa

y

i n a pi ckup t ruck wi

t h wh at l o o ked l i

ke a f o urt h perso n t i ed up f

ace -do wn i

n t h e b ack. L ero y s aw

a f i r e burn i n g at t h e pro pert y l at er t h at n i gh t b ut di d n o t s ee t h at as un us ual b eca

us e “ t h ey al

way s

m ade f i res ev ery day

. ” T h e n ex

t day

, L o pez t o l d L ero y t h at L o pez h ad h i t t h e v i ct i m

. L at er t h at day

,

L ero y o v erh eard L o pez, Go n zal ez, an d F ari as t al ki n g ab o ut h av i

n g “ t aken care o f s o m eb o dy

. ” L ero yLOP EZ DI SSENT — 4

al s o h eard Go n zal ez s ay t h at t h e v i ct i m h ad s ai d s o m et h i

n g ab o ut t h ei

r mo t h er an d t h at t h ey g o t

pret t y an gry ab o ut i

t

, s o t h ey t o o k care o f h i

m

. W h en as ked i f Go n zal ez t o l d h i m h o w t h ey t o o k care

o f t h e v i ct i

m

, L ero y respo n ded, “ He s ai d t h at t h ey t o o k h i m s o m ewh ere an d s t ab b ed h i m

. ” W h en

as ked wh at el s e Go n zal ez sa i d, L ero y an s wered t h at h e s ai d t h at t h ey

, t h e t wo b ro t h ers, t o o k t urn s

s t ab b i n g h i m

. T h e n ex

t day

, L ero y recei

v ed a cal l f

ro m F ari as t o pi ck t h e t wo b ro t h ers up. Us i n g

F ari as ’ s t ruck, L ero y pi cked t h em up at a l o cat i o n n ear wh ere t h e v i ct i m ’ s rem ai n s were ult i

m at el y

f o un d. T h e b ro t h ers were s wea t y

, t h ey s m el l ed l i ke a dead an i

m al

, an d t h ey were carry i

n g s h o v el s

.

A co upl e o f day s l at er, L ero y s aw Go n zal ez an d F ari as was h i n g o ut t h e b edl i

n er o f F ari as ’ s t ruck.

T h ey h ad n ev er was h ed i

t b ef o re.

A t s o m e po i

n t af t er t h e b o n es were f

o un d i n 2009, po l i ce co n

t act ed L ero y ’ s y

o un ger b ro t h er

J erem y T ri go i n qui ri n g ab o ut L ero y

. A f

t erwards, J erem

y cal l ed Lo pez t o as k wh at was go i n g o n

,

an d L o pez cam

e o v er t o J erem

y ’ s pl ace t o t al

k t o h i m

. J erem y t o l d L o pez, “ W el l

, t h ey f o un d b o n es

b y y o ur h o us e, a b l o ck do wn f ro m y o ur h o us e. Yo u h av e t o kn o w wh at ’ s go i n g o n

. Ra

n gers cam

e

t o m y h o us e l o o ki

n g f o r m y b ro t h er. ” L o pez respo n ded t h at J erem y ’ s b ro t h er “ was n o t i

n v o l v ed i n

an y part o f t h at

. ” L o pez i

n i t i al l y den i ed h i s o wn i

n v o l v em en t

, b ut J erem

y deci ded t o t ry t o m an i

pul at e

h i m i n t o t el l i n g t h e t rut h

. J erem

y as ked wh

y L o pez di d n o t “ di s po s e o f t h e b o dy a di f f eren t way t o

wh ere i t wo ul d n o t h av e l ed t o t h i s

. ” L o pez an s wered

, “I t w a s no t l i k e t h at

, b ut I t o o k care o f

t h i n gs

. ” J erem

y as ked h i m

, “ Ho w co m e y

o u di dn ’ t b urn t h at b o dy

. Ho w co m e y o u di dn ’ t l eav e h i

m

al l o v er t o wn ? ” L o pez respo n ded, “ T h ey ’ re n o t go i n g t o kn o w t h at i

t was m e t h at di d t h at

. I t o o k

care o f t h i n gs

. ” J erem

y respo n ded, “ Yo u di dn ’ t t ake care o f an y t h i n g. Ob v i o us l

y

, t h e b o n es are t h ere.

Yo u di d n o t b urn an

y t h i n g, t h e ev i den ce i s t h ere. W h at ’ s go i n g o n ? ” L o pez repl i ed, “ Bro

, I t o o k care

o f t h i n gs

, cut h i

m up i n t o pi ece s an d t o o k h i s h ead o f f

. ” T h i s desc r i p t i o n m a t c he d t h e f act t h eLOP EZ DI SSENT — 5

vi c t i m ’ s b o n es were f

o un d s cat t ered at t h e grav e s i t e an d t h at t h e s kul l was n ev er f o u nd

. L o p e z

f urt h er t o l d J erem

y t h at

, regardi

n g F ari as

, h e was go i

n g t o “ t ake h i

m o ut

, ” an d regardi

n g L ero y

, h e

was go i n g t o “ ki ck h i s as s

. ”

Ph y s i cal ev i den ce al s o l i

n ked L o pez an d Go n zal ez t o t h e c r i m e

. A cel l ph o n e, b urn ed b ut

reco gn i zab l e as a Cri cket f l i p ph o n e o f t h e t y

pe t h e v i ct i

m carri ed, was f

o und bu ri ed b eh i

n d t h e

b ro t h ers’ t rai l er. A b el

t b uckl e i den

t i f i ed as Hugh es ’ s b y h i s wi do w was f o un d b urn ed i

n a t ub i n t h e

b ro t h ers’ y ard.

Ph o n e reco rds s h o wed t h at Hugh es cal l ed Gl o ri a repeat edl y duri n g t h e earl

y mo rn i n g h o urs

o f No v em b er 2, 2008. T h e def

en s e el i ci t ed t h at t h e reco rds s h o wed, o n t h at s am e dat e, t h at Hugh es

cal l ed Ro x an

n e Ro b l edo t wi ce an d Ro b l edo cal l ed Hugh es t wi ce.

Sergean t Dav i d E s pi

n o za, o f t h e A l i ce Po l i ce Depa rt m en t

, was ques t i o n ed at t ri al ab o ut ro o m

ei gh t o f t h e S un s et M o t el

. T h es e quest i o n s were aske d b y L o pez’ s def en s e at t o rn ey

. W

h en as ked

wh et h er b l o o d was f

o un d o n t h e wal l s

, E s pi

n o za an s wered,

W el l

, t h ey

—t h ey co ul dn ’ t t el l m e ex act l y i f i t was b l o o d o r n o t

. T h ey s ai d i t co ul d

h av e b een s o m

et h i n g el s e o t h er t h an b l o o d, b ut t h ey co ul dn ’ t t el l m e f o r s ure i f i t was

b l o o d o r n o t b eca

us e—j us t b eca

us e i t s eem s l i ke i t i n t h e pi ct ure, l i

ke t h ere i s b l o o d,

do es n ’ t m ean t h ere’ s b l o o d f ro m wh at I was t o l d f

ro m t h e DPS cri

m e l ab

.

E s pi n o za t e s t i f

i e d t h at peo pl e f

ro m t h e cri

m e l ab t o o k ph o t o s o f t h e ro o m an d t o o k s am pl es

.

E s pi n o za was s ub s equen

t l y as ked b y def

en s e co un s el

, “ Di d y

o u get an y resul t s as t o t h e det erm

i n at i o n

o f wh at t h i s b l o o d m at ch ed up wi t h o r an y ki n d o f f o ren s i c ev i den ce ab o ut t h e b l o o d? ” He an s wered,

“ W e—wh at we di d was we go t a t o o t h b rush t h at b el o n ged t o E n ri que Hugh es t o s ee i f t h ere was

an y co m pari s o n

. A

n d i t cam e b ack—i t cam e b ack n o t f

ro m h i m

. ”LOP EZ DI SSENT — 6

Ra y Ra m o n

, a T ex as Ra

n ger at t h e t i

m e o f t h e i n v es t i gat i o n

, t es t i f

i ed f o r t h e St at e t h at t h ere 2

were “ n o l i

n ks o f M r. Hugh es b ei

n g” i n t h e mo t el ro o m

. Duri

n g ques t i o n i

n g b y Go n zal ez’ s def

en s e

at t o rn ey

, Ra

n ger Ra m o n t es t i f i ed ab o ut t h e cr i

m e l ab ’ s des i

re t o get a t o o t h

b rush o r h ai

rb rush t h at

wo ul d h av e t h e v i ct i

m ’ s DNA :

T h e cri m e l ab wan

t ed us t o o b t ai

n f ro m M rs. Hugh es a t o o t h

b rush o r a h ai

r b rush o r

s o m et h i n g t h at M r. Hugh es wo ul d us e o n a dai l y b as i s f o r t h em t o b e ab l e t o ex

t ract

D N A f r o m t h at part i cul ar i

t em

, at wh i ch po i

n t we di d get a t o o t h

b rush f ro m M r s

. Hugh es an d t h ey w e r e ab l e t o get DNA f ro m t h e t o o t h

b rush t o co m

pare i t t o t h e

i t em s t h at t h ey f

o un d at t h e S un s et M o t el

. ” 3

He f urt h er t es t i f

i ed t h at “ I h av e a repo rt wh ere t h ey di dn ’ t f i n d an y t h i n g” an d t h at i

t was at t ach ed t o

h i s o wn i n v es t i gat i v e r epo rt

. 4

B

. Appl icant ’s H abeas Theor y of th e Case

On h ab eas

, A

ppl i can t prese n t s a di f f eren t t h eo ry o f t h e cas e. Hi s t h eo ry i s t h at s o m eo n e el s e

ki l l ed Hugh es an d i

t was i n ro o m ei gh

t o f t he S u ns e t M o t e l

. T h e ev i den ce t o s uppo rt t h i s t h eo ry

co m es f ro m a po l i ce repo rt o f t h e i n v es t i gat i o n at t h at mo t el

. No n e o f t h e f o l l o wi n g i n f o rm at i o n i

n

t h e po l i ce r epo rt was prese n t ed as ev i den ce at t ri al

.

E l o i s e J o s l i

n

, wh o t h e po l i ce repo rt s ugges t ed was t h e v i ct i m ’ s n i ece

, s ai d t h at s h e t al ked t o

Ro b l edo ab o ut t h e v i ct i

m ’ s di s app e a r a nc e

. A cco rdi n g t o J o s l i

n

, Ro b l edo s ai d t h at t h e v i ct i m was

s uppo s ed t o pay h er f

o r s ex b ut co ul d n o t get h i s So ci al Securi t y mo n ey t h at was b ei

n g h el d b y h i s

A t t h e t i m e o f h i s t es t i

m o n y

, Ra mo n was t h e Ch i ef Deput y o f t h e J i m W el l s Co un

t y Sh eri f f ’ s 2

Of f i ce. Gi v en h i s s t at us at t h e t i

m e o f t h e i n v es t i gat i o n

, I wi l l ref

er t o h i m as “ Ra n ger Ra mo n

. ”

Pr es um ab l

y

, t h e cri m e l ab reques t ed a t o o t h

b rush o r h ai

r b rush b eca

us e t h e v i ct i

m ’ s b o dy 3

h ad n o t y et b een f

o un d.

T h e t ri al co urt adm

o n i s h ed Ra

n ger Ra mo n t h at h i s t es t i

mo n y ab o ut h av i

n g t h e repo rt was 4

n o t respo n s i

v e t o def en s e co un s el ’ s ques t i o n

, b ut t h e t ri al co urt di d n o t s t ri ke t h e respo n s e f ro m t h e

reco rd o r i

n s t ruct t h e j ury t o di s regard i t

.LOP EZ DI SSENT — 7

wi f e. T h en Ro b l edo s ai d s h e an d t h e v i ct i m go t i n t o a f i gh t ab o ut mo n ey an d drugs. Ro b l edo s ai d

s h e b eca m e s o an gry t h at s h e h i

t t h e v i ct i m o n t h e h ead s ev eral t i

m es wi t h a f o ur- b y -f o ur p i e c e o f

wo o d an d t h at t h i s caus ed h i s h ead t o s pl i t o pen

. Ro b l edo t o l d h er t h at F ran k Vi l l agran h ad t h e b o dy

t aken an d b uri ed i t at h i s ran ch

.

Vi dal Ra m i rez, wh o wo rked f

o r Vi l l agran

, t o l d po l i ce t h at h e h eard Vi l l agran s ay t h at Ro b l edo

h ad “ wh acke d s o m e guy o v er t h e h ead an d t h at h e di ed.” J uan Hugh es t o l d po l i ce t h at h e h eard t h at

Ra m i rez h ad t o l d an i

n di v i dual t h at Ro b l edo h ad h i t t h e v i ct i m wi t h a t wo -b y -f

o ur. He st at ed t h at

t h e r um o r was t h at Ra

m i rez h eard t h i s s t o ry f

ro m s o m e gi

rl s at a par t y t h at Ra

m i rez at t en ded.

M el i s s a Cas as t o l d po l i ce t h at a m an n am ed Jo e B. b eat up t h e v i ct i m af t er t h ey go t i

n t o an

argum en t at t h e m o t el ro o m

. T h e po l i ce i n t erv i ewe d J o e B. T rev i

n o

, wh o adm

i t t ed b ei n g at t h e mo t el

ro o m b ut s ai d h e l ef

t wee ks b ef

o re No v em

b er 2, 2008. He o f

f ered t o t ake a po l y g r a p h t es t an d

agreed t o s ub m

i t DNA s am

pl es

. Ca s as l at er t o l d po l i ce t h at s h e h ad l i ed ab o ut J o e B. a s s aul t i n g t h e

v i ct i m

. Ca s as s ai d t h at Ro b l edo call ed Vi l l agran t o s ay t h at t h e v i ct i m was s t i l l i

n t h e ro o m an d t h at

,

s h o rt l y af t erwards, t wo m en s h o wed u p

, a s k e d t he v i ct i m i f h e kn ew wh

y t h ey were t h ere (h e di d

n o t ), an d pro cee ded t o b eat h i m up. A cco rdi

n g t o Ca s as

, s h e an d Ro b l edo were t h en t o l d t o l eav e

t h e r o o m

.

Susi e Go n zal ez t o l d po l i ce t h at Ro b l edo t o l d h er t h at s h e di d n o t ki l l an y o n e, t h at t h e v i ct i

m

was ki l l ed b y t wo guy s f

ro m t h e M ex i can M af

i a, an d t h at h i s b o dy was dum ped i n a creek b eh i

n d t h e

m o t el

.

Ro b l edo adm

i t t ed t o t h e po l i ce t h at s h e kn ew Hugh es b ut s ai d h e h ad n ev er b een t o t h e mo t el

ro o m

.

C. DNA Tes t Res ul tsLOP EZ DI SSENT — 8

T h ere were f

o ur DNA t es t repo rt s f

ro m 2009, o n l

y t wo o f wh i ch are i

n t h e r eco rd. On e o f

t h e 2009 repo rt s t h at we h av e i s t h e repo rt t h at was adm i t t ed at t ri al

–t h e m i s s i n g perso n s r e p o r t

,

dat ed Dec em

b er 22, 2009, wh i ch us ed DNA f ro m t h e v i ct i

m ’ s rel at i v es t o m at ch t h e rem ai

n s f o un d

at t h e b uri al s i

t e t h at F ari as l ed t h e po l i ce t o

.

T h e o t h er 2009 repo rt t h at we h av e i s an i n i t i al DNA repo rt dat ed F eb ruar y 17, 2009. T h at

repo rt l i s t s t h e v ari o us s wab s an d m at eri al t aken f ro m t h e mo t el ro o m

, a s h i rt t aken f ro m a car, t wo

s h i rt s t aken f

ro m o t h er l o cat i o n s

, an d v ari o us o t h er m at eri al s

. Of t h e s wab s a nd m at eri al s t aken 5

f ro m t h e m

o t el ro o m

, t h e repo rt i den t i f i es s ev en i

t em s o n wh i ch bl o o d w a s d e t ect ed b ut do es n o t

pro v i de t es t resul

t s f o r t h e i t em s o r ev en s t at e t h at t h e i t em s were t es t ed. Ra t h er, t h e repo rt s ay s o n l y

t h at t h o s e i

t em s are b ei

n g ret ai n ed, wh i ch s ugges t s t h at t h e i t em s h ad n o t y et b een t es t ed o r res ul t s

h ad n o t y et b een recei

v ed.

T h ere are t wo s uppl em

en t al DNA repo rt s t h at are n o t i n t h e h ab eas reco rd, o n e dat ed A ugus t

31, 2009 an d t h e o t h er dat ed S ept em b er 29, 2009. W e kn o w t h at t h es e repo rt s ex i s t (o r ex i s t ed at

o n e t i m e) b eca us e t h ere i s a DNA repo rt f ro m J ul y 18, 2019 i

n t h e h ab eas reco rd t h at ref ers t o t h em

.

W e do n o t kn o w wh at t h es e t wo s uppl em en t al 2009 DNA repo rt s s ay

.

Ho wev er, t h e 2019 repo rt ref l ect s t h e t es t i

n g (o r ret es t i

n g) o f t h e s ev en i

t em s f ro m t h e mo t el

.

A s s um i n g t h e DNA f

ro m t h e t o o t h

b rush b el o n ged t o t h e v i ct i m

, t h e v i ct i

m was ex cl

uded f ro m t h e

f i rst t h ree i t em s

. T rev i

n o ’ s DNA was n o t ex cl

uded f ro m t h e t h i

rd i t em

. T h e remai

n i n g f o ur i t em s

y i el ded n o DNA pro f

i l e o r n o i n t erpr et ab l e DNA pro f

i l e.

F o r m an y o f t h e s wab s an d m at eri al s co l l ect ed, t h e repo rt det ai l e d t h at n o b l o o d was 5

det ect ed. T h e repo rt i

n di cat ed t h at b l o o d was det ect ed o n t h e s h i rt t aken f ro m t h e car an d t h e t wo

s h i rt s t aken f ro m o t h er l o cat i o n s

, b ut n o DNA pro f i l e co ul d b e o b t ai

n ed o n t h e s h i

rt f ro m t h e car an d

o n e o f t h e o t h er s h i

rt s

, an d t h e v i ct i

m was ex cl

uded f ro m t h e DNA pro f

i l e o n t h e r em

ai n i n g s h i rt

.LOP EZ DI SSENT — 9

I I

. ANAL YSIS

A. F al s e Tes ti m ony Cl aim

Due pr o ces s can b e v i o l at ed b y t h e S t at e’ s kn o wi n g o r un kn o wi n g us e o f f

al s e t es t i mo n y

. 6

F o r due pro ces s t o b e v i o l at ed, t h e t es t i mo n y m us t b e b o t h f

al s e an d m at eri al

. T es t i

mo n y i s deem ed 7

t o b e f al s e i f

, t a k e n a s a w h o l e, i

t gi v es t h e j ury a f

al s e i m press i o n

. Be caus e I co n cl ude t h at t h e 8

rel ev an t t es t i m o ny d o e s no t gi

v e ri s e t o a f

al s e i m press i o n

, I n eed n o t addres s t h e s t an dard o f

m at eri al i t y t h at wo ul d appl

y t o t h i s cas e.

In f i n di n gs 14 t h ro ugh 19, t h e h ab eas co urt s t at ed:

14. A t t ri al

, Sgt

. E s pi

no z a t es t i f

i ed t h at resul

t s o f co m pari n g t h e b l o o d f

ro m t h e

m o t el t o Hugh es ’ s DNA f

ro m t h e t o o t h

b r u s hes es t ab l i s h ed t h at t h e b l o o d was n o t

f ro m Hugh es

. E s pi

n o za al s o t o l d t h e j ury t h at t h e l ab co ul d no t t e l l i f s o m e o f t h e

s t ai n s were b l o o d o r n o t an d t h e i t em s t h at were b l o o d was n o t b l o o d f ro m Hugh es

.

15

. T h i s 2009 L ab Re po rt do es n o t

, co n t rar y t o wh at was prese n

t ed i n t ri al

, es t ab l i s h

t h at t h e b l o o d s t a i ns di d n o t b el o n g t o Hugh es

. T h e l ab repo rt i n di cat es t h at t h e

t o o t h b rush es co n

t ai n ed m i x t ure DNA

, t h e l ab us ed o n e o f t h e DNA pro f i l es f ro m a

t o o t h b rush t h at purpo rt edl

y b el o n ged t o Hugh es

, an d as s um ed t h at t h i s DNA was t h at

o f Hugh es

. T h e l ab t h en co m pared t h e as s um ed DNA pro f i l e agai n s t t h e b l o o d i

n t h e

h o t el

. T h e 2009 L ab Re s ul t al s o es t ab l i s h ed, co n

t rar y t o E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y

, t h at

s o m e o f t h e ev i den ce co l l ect ed was i n f act b l o o d, b ut t h e l ab co ul d n o t g e t a DNA

pro f i l e f ro m t h e b l o o d t o t es t i

t agai n s t t h e ass um ed Hugh es DNA pro f i l e.

16. T h e 2009 L ab Re po rt

, wh i ch co n t radi ct E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

m o n y ab o ut t h e resul

t s

,

was n o t prese n

t ed at t ri al

, b ut was f

av o rab l e t o t h e def

en s e.

17. T h e i

t em s i n t h e 2009 L ab Re po rt were ret es t ed an d t h e 2019 repo rt s t i l l

es t ab l i s h ed t h at t h e as s um e d D N A f ro m Hugh es ex cl

uded h i m as t h e s o urce o f t h e

s am pl es

. T h e l ab n ev er t es t ed t h e b l o o d ev i den ce f ro m t h e mo t el ro o m agai n s t a

kn o wn DNA s am

pl e f ro m Hugh es

.

E x parte L alonde

, 570 S. W

. 3d 716, 722 (T ex

. Cri m

. A pp. 2019). 6

Id. 7

E x parte De La Cr

uz

, 466 S. W

. 3d 855, 866 (T ex

. Cri m

. A pp. 2015). 8LOP EZ DI SSENT — 10

18. Sgt

. E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

m o n y at t ri al was m

i s l eadi n g b eca us e h e t es t i f

i ed t h at t h e l ab

ex cl uded Hugh es

.

19. T h i s l ab repo rt do es n o t af f i rm at i v el y e xc l u de Hugh es as t h e s o urce o f b l o o d

b eca us e t h e l ab di d n o t h av e h i s act ual DNA pro f i l e.

T h e h ab eas co urt ’ s s t at em en t i n f i n di n g 14 t h at Sergean

t E s pi n o za “ t o l d t h e j ury t h at t h e l ab

co ul d n o t t el l i f s o m e o f t h e st ai n s were b l o o d” i s s i

m pl y i n acc urat e. Sergean

t E s pi n o za n ev er t o l d

t h e j ury t h at t h e l ab co ul d n o t t el l i f s o m e s t ai n s were b l o o d. W

h at h e s ai d was t h at DPS l ab o rat o ry

perso n n el

, wh o were at t h e m o t el ro o m co l l ect i n g ev i den ce, t o l d h i

m t h at o n e can

n o t t el l f o r s ure b y

l o o ki n g at a wal l t h at t h e st ai

n o n t h e wal l i s b l o o d. T h at i s a t rue s t at em en t

, an d t h e i

n i t i al repo rt

ul t i m at el y ba c ked i

t up: f o r a great n

um b er o f s wab s an d s t ai

n s t aken f ro m t h e mo t el ro o m

, t h e

prese n ce o f b l o o d was n o t det ect ed.

F urt h er, t h e h ab eas co u r t ’s f i n di n gs are m i s l eadi n g wh en t h ey s ugges t Sergean t E s pi n o za

t es t i f i ed t h at t h e b l o o d s t ai

n s di d n o t b el o n g t o t h e v i ct i m

, an d t h e f

i n di n gs are i n acc urat e wh en t h ey

s ugges t t h at t h e repo rt was co n t rar y t o h i s t es t i

mo n y b eca us e s o m e b l o o d s t ai

n s di d no t y i e l d a

pro f i l e. Sergean

t E s pi n o za was n o t as ked i f t h e l ab repo rt es t ab l i s h ed wh et h er al l o f t h e v ari o us b l o o d

s t ai n s i n t h e m o t el ro o m b el o n ged t o t h e v i ct i m

. He was as ked i f an

y resul t s were o b t ai

n ed, an d h e

respo n ded t h at t h e resul

t s ex cl uded t h e v i ct i

m

. If t h e 2019 repo rt i s an acc urat e s um m at i o n o f wh at

t h e m i s s i n g 2009 s uppl em

en t al repo rt o n t h i s m at t er s ai d, t h en Sergean t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y was

t rue. T h e resul

t s t h at were o b t ai

n ed ex cl uded t h e v i ct i

m

. He was n o t as ked wh et h er t h e l ab was ab l e

t o o b t ai n resul t s f ro m al l t h e sam

pl es

. 9

A n d s i n ce we do n o t h av e t h e suppl em en t al 2009 repo rt s i

n t h e reco rd, we do n o t kn o w 9

wh et h er resul

t s were o b t ai

n ed f ro m t h e r em

ai n i n g f o ur s am pl es o f b l o o d. It i s po s s i

b l e t h at resul

t s

were o b t ai

n ed t h en b ut co ul d n o t b e o b t ai n ed i n 2019 due t o degradat i o n o f t h e s am pl e t h ro ugh t h e

pas s age o f t i

m e. T h e po s s i

b i l i t y rem ai n s

, t h en

, t h at al l s ev en o f t h e b l o o d s t ai n s were f o un d n o t t o

m at ch t h e DNA o n t h e v i ct i m ’ s t o o t h b rush

.LOP EZ DI SSENT — 11

T h e f i n di n gs al s o err t o s ugges t t h at Sergean t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y was i n acc urat e i

n t h at

t h e l ab o n l

y presum ed t h at t h e t o o t h

b rush co n t ai n ed t h e v i ct i

m ’ s DNA

. Sergean

t E s pi n o za t es t i f

i ed

t h at t h e DNA ref

eren ce s am

pl e f o r t h e v i ct i

m was f ro m t h e v i ct i

m ’ s t o o t h b rush

. In addi

t i o n

, Ra n ger

Ra m o n t es t i f i ed t h at t h e cri

m e l ab as ked t h e po l i ce t o o b t ai n f ro m M rs. Hugh e s a t o o t hbr u s h o r

h ai rb rush us ed b y t h e v i ct i

m o n a dai l

y b as i s i n o rder f o r t h em t o ex

t ract DNA

. T h e DNA ref eren ce

s am pl e f o r t h e v i ct i

m was f ro m t h e v i ct i

m ’ s t o o t h b rush

. So ev ery o n e at t ri al kn ew t h at t h e DNA us ed

as a r ef eren ce sa m pl e f o r t h e v i ct i

m di d n o t co m e di

rect l y f ro m t h e v i ct i

m o r f ro m t h e b o n es f

o un d

at t h e grav e s i t e

, bu t i n s t ead f ro m h i s t o o t h

b rush

, as reques t ed b y t h e cri m e l ab

. If t h e def

en s e

at t o rn ey s wan

t ed t o po i n t o ut t h at t h e t o o t h

b rush was

, at b es t

, an i

n di rect s o urce o f DNA an d t h at

t h e DNA f

o un d o n i t m i gh t n o t act ual l

y b e t h e v i ct i

m ’ s DNA

, t h ey co ul d h av e do n e s o

. A n d wh i l e

t h e repo rt s ay s t h e DNA o n t h e t o o t h b rush was a m i

x t ure, ev en n o w, n o o n e h as pro duced an y

ev i den ce t ha t t he m a

j o r co m po n en t o f t h e DNA f

ro m t h e t o o t h

b rush was n o t i

n f act t h e v i ct i

m ’ s

DNA

. No s uch ev i den ce h as b een pr o d u c e d d e s p i t e t h e av ai l ab i l i t y o f t h e DNA pro f

i l e f ro m t h e

b o n es as a b as i s f

o r co m pari s o n

.

F i n di n g 16 i s co rr ect t h at t h e l ab repo rt was n o t prese n t ed at t ri al

. But t h e i

n i t i al 2009 l ab

repo rt t h at was b ef

o re t h e h ab eas co urt do es n o t co n t radi ct Sergean

t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y b eca us e

i t h as n o t h i

n g t o do wi

t h h i s t es t i m o n y

. T h e mo t el ro o m i

t em s were n o t an al

y zed i n t h at 2009 repo rt ;

t h ey were r et ai

n ed f o r f ut ure an al y s i s

. W i t h o ut kn o wi

n g wh at i s i

n t h e suppl em

en t al 2009 repo rt s

,

t h e h ab eas co urt can

n o t kn o w wh et h er ei

t h er o f t h em co n

t radi ct s Sergean

t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y

.

E v en as s um

i n g t h at t h e 2 0 1 9 r e p o rt cam e t o t h e s am

e co n cl us i o n s as t h e rel ev an

t (b ut m i s s i n g)

s uppl em en t al 20 0 9 repo rt

, i

t do es n o t co n

t radi ct Sergean

t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y f o r t h e reas o n s

o ut l i n ed earl i er. A

n d n o t h i n g i n t h e DNA repo rt s t h at we do h av e i s ex cul pat o ry

. No t h i

n g i n t h o s eLOP EZ DI SSENT — 12

repo rt s l i n ks t h e v i ct i

m t o t h e S un s et M o t el

. No r i s an y t h i n g i n t h o s e r epo rt s i

m peac h i n g s i n ce t h e

co n t en t o f t h o s e r epo rt s do n o t i n f act co n t radi ct Sergean

t E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y

.

In f i n di n g 20, t h e h ab eas c o u r t m i s reads t h e St at e’ s cl o s i

n g argum en

t

. Here i s wh at t h e

h ab eas co urt s ai d:

T h e pro s ecut i

n g at t o rn ey s di d n o t and m a d e no ef f o rt t o co rr ect Sgt

. E s pi

n o za’ s

err o n eo us t es t i

m o n y b ef o re t h e j ury

. In f

act

, t h e D i s t ri ct A

t t o rn ey ’ s Of

f i ce

em ph as i zed E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

m o n y duri n g cl o s i n g argum en

t :

T h ere’ s n o ev i den ce agai

n s t i t

. [E s pi n o za’ s ] t es t i

m o n y i s s t o n e co l d.

It ’ s ro ck s o l i d, un l es s y o u t h i n k h e was j us t s i

t t i n g up h ere l

y i n g. A n d

i f y o u t hi nk he was l

y i n g, l o o k m e i

n t h e ey e an d t el l h i

m t h at y o u

h o n es t l y t h i n k h e was l y i n g

. . . No w, we’ v e h eard al l ab o ut t h i s – t h ey

t o l d y o u i n t h ei r o pen i n g s t at em en t t h at t h ey were go i

n g t o cal l t h es e

– t h at t h ey were go i

n g t o cal l t h es e – t h ey were go i n g t o pro v e t h es e

t wo pro s t i t u t e s h ad ki l l ed Hen ry Hugh es an d h i s – h i s b l o o d—t h ey

ki l l ed h i m i n t h i s h o t el

, h i s b l o o d was t h ere, an d i t was o n t h i s car. T h e

Ra n ger t o l d y o u t h at t h ere was n o DNA resul t s t h at were ret urn ed

po s i t i v e t o Hen ry H u g he s

, e i

t h er i n t h e car o r i

n t h at h o t el

. T h at ’ s

di s h o n es t

. T h at ’ s n o t t rue as f ar as a def en s e pri n ci pl e. Very cl earl

y

,

n o DNA cam

e b ack t o co n

n ect t h o s e t wo pl ace s o r t h o s e t wo i t em s

t o t h i s m urder

. 1 0

T h e h ab eas co urt i

n s ert ed Sergean

t E s pi n o za’ s n am

e i n b racket s

. T h at i

n s ert i o n i s i

n co rr ect b eca

us e

t h e pro s ecut o r wa s no t r e f err i n g t o Sergean

t E s pi n o za—h e was ref

err i n g t o Ra n ger Ra mo n

. T h e

rel ev an t t ex t o f t h e S t at e’ s cl o s i

n g argum en

t b ef o re t h e el l i

ps i s i s as f

o l l o ws :

W h en t h ey as ked Dav i d E s pi n o za wh ere t h e repo rt s were, h e s ay s

, I do n ’ t kn o w, t h e

Ra n ger di d t h at

, h e’ s go t t h em

. W e’ v e go t t h e Ra n ger h ere. Re m em

b er h i s t es t i

m o n y

wh en t h ey ’ re t al

ki n g ab o ut t h at ? He sa

y s

, I’v e go t t h e r epo rt

. Di d t h ey as k f o r i t ?

Di d t h ey want t o s e e i t ? J us t b eca us e h e t es t i f

i ed t o i t —n o w un derst an d, i

t was

un co n t radi ct ed t h at h e t es t i f

i ed t o t h at i s s ue. T h ere’ s n o ev i den ce aga i ns t i t

. Hi s

t es t i m o n y i s s t o n e co l d. It ’ s ro ck so l i d, un l es s y o u t h i n k h e was j us t s i

t t i n g up h ere

l y i n g. A n d i f y o u t h i

n k h e was l y i n g, l o o k m e i

n t h e ey e an d t el l h i

m t h at y o u h o n es t l

y

t h i n k h e was l y i n g.

Bracke t s an d el l i

ps i s i n h ab eas co urt ’ s f

i n di n gs

. 1 0LOP EZ DI SSENT — 13

In f i n di n g 21, t h e h ab eas co urt s ay s t h at Ra n ger Ra mo n ’ s t es t i

mo n y t h at “ n o t h i

n g f ro m t h e

Go l d M al i

b u was l i n ked t o Hugh es ” was “ m

i s l eadi n g” b eca us e t h ere “ was b l o o d o n an i t em i n t h e

t run k. ” Ho wev er, t h e h ab eas co urt ackn o wl edges i n t h at f i n di n g t h at n o DNA pro f

i l e was o b t ai

n ed.

So Ra n ger Ra m o n ’ s t es t i

m o n y t h at t h ere was n o l i

n k t o t h e v i ct i

m was co rr ect

. 1 1

In f i n di n g 23, t h e h ab eas co urt s t at es :

T h i s Co urt f

i n ds t h at E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y regardi n g t h e resul

t s o f t h e l ab t es t i

n g was

f al s e an d m i s l eadi n g. T h i s Co urt f

urt h er f i n ds t h at t h e Di s t ri ct A

t t o rn ey ’ s Of

f i ce f ai l ed

t o co rr ect t h i s t es t i

m o n y

. T h i s Co urt f

urt h er f i n ds t h at t h i s err o n eo us t es t i mo n y was

em ph as i zed b y t h e Di s t ri ct A t t o rn ey ’ s Of

f i ce an d rel i ed o n t o co n

v i ct A ppl i can t

.

F o r t h e reas o n s di s cus s ed earl i er, t h i s f i n di n g i s n o t s uppo rt ed b y t h e reco rd. Sergean t E s pi n o za was

as ked—b y def

en s e co un s el

—i f t h ere were “ an

y resul t s as t o t h e det erm i

n at i o n o f wh at t h i s b l o o d

m at ch ed up wi

t h o r an y ki n d o f f o ren s i c ev i den ce ab o ut t h e b l o o d” an d h e an s wered t h at a t o o t h b rush

s am pl e was us ed f

o r co m pari s o n an d t h e resul

t s “ cam e b ack n o t f

ro m h i m

. ” E v en as s um

i n g t h e 2019

r e p o r t c o n

v ey s t h e s am

e i n f o rm at i o n as was i

n t h e m i s s i n g s uppl em

en t al 2009 repo rt

, Sergea nt

E s pi n o za’ s t es t i

m o n y was b o t h l i

t eral l y t rut h f ul (t h e resul

t s t h at were o b t ai

n ed ex cl uded t h e v i ct i

m )

an d n o t m

i s l eadi n g (n o t h i n g l i n ked t h e mo t el ro o m t o t h e v i ct i m an d wh at evi d e nc e t he re was

ex cl uded t h e v i ct i

m ).

B

. I nef

f ective Ass istance Cl aim

Un der Stric kland v. W

as hington

, an i

n ef f ect i v e ass i s t an ce cl ai

m requi res a s h o wi

n g o f b o t h

de f i c i e nt a t t o rn ey perf

o rm an ce an d prej udi ce. T o s h o w prej udi ce, t h e appl i can t m us t s h o w “ a 1 2

reas o n ab l e pro b ab i l i

t y t h at

, b ut f

o r co un s el ’ s un

pro f es s i o n al err o rs, t h e resul

t o f t h e pro cee di

n g wo ul d

F i n di n g 22 s t at es t h at t h e 2019 repo rt b as i call y cam e t o t h e s am

e co n cl us i o n as t h e 2009 1 1

repo rt

.

466 U.S

. 668, 687 (1984)

.

1 2LOP EZ DI SSENT — 14

h av e b een di f

f eren t

. A reas o n ab l e pr o b ab i l i

t y i s a pr o b ab i l i

t y s uf f i ci en t t o un derm

i n e co n f i den ce i n

t h e o ut co m e.” In f

i n di n g 27, t h e h ab eas co urt s ay s : 1 3

Hav i n g t h es e resul

t s

, co un s el co ul d h av e i

m peac h ed E s pi

n o za’ s t es t i

mo n y an d def en s e

co un s el co ul d h av e co n

t i n ued prese n

t i n g t h ei r t h eo ry t ha t Hugh es was ki l l ed i n t h e

Sun s et M o t el

. In s t ead, co un s el a ba nd o n ed t h i s v i ab l e def en s e, di d n o t prese n

t an y

wi t n es s es s uppo rt i

n g t h i s t h eo ry

, cea s ed ques t i o n i n g wi t n es s es ab o ut t h i s t h eo ry

, an d

b o t h at t o rn ey s o n l

y b ri ef l y m en t i o n ed t h e m

o t el i n t h ei r cl o s i n g ar g u m e nt s

. T h

us

,

co un s el was def

i ci en t f o r f ai l i n g t o o b t ai

n t h e t es t i n g resul t s t o us e at t ri al an d t h i s al s o

prej udi ced A

ppl i can t b eca us e A ppl i can t ’ s def en s e was n o t adequat el

y prese n t ed t o t h e

j ury

.

A ppl i can t ’ s h ab eas t h eo ry do es n o t prese n t a v i ab l e def

en s e b eca us e i t s uf f ers f ro m s eri o us

f l aws

. T o b egi

n wi t h

, t h e h ab eas t h eo ry do es n o t acc o un t f o r F ari as ’ s kn o wl edge o f t h e l o cat i o n o f

t h e v i ct i m ’ s b o dy

. No t h i

n g i n t h e po l i ce i

n v es t i gat i o n o f Ro b l edo

, Ca s as

, an d t h e m o t e l r o o m

co n n ect s F ari as t o t h em

. T o t h e co n t rar y

, peo pl e t h at appea

r t o b e co m

pl et el y un rel at ed t o F ari as

are po s i t ed b y t h e Sun s et M o t el wi t n es s es as t h e o n es wh o ki l l ed t h e v i ct i m an d di s po s ed o f t h e b o dy

.

Ho w, t h en

, di d F ari as kn o w wh ere t h e b o dy was l o cat ed? Des pi t e t h e v ari o us l i es an d i

n co n s i s t en ci es

i n F ari as ’ s acc o un

t s t o t h e po l i ce, h i s kn o wl edge o f t h e l o cat i o n o f t h e dead v i ct i m ’ s rem ai n s t i es h i m

t o t h e m urder

. A n d wh i l e F ari as h as n o kn o wn as s o ci at i o n wi t h t h e v ari o us ch aract ers i n t h e Sun s et

M o t el n arr at i

v e, h e was cl o s el

y co n n ect ed wit h L o pez an d Go n zal ez—h e l i v ed o n t h ei

r pro pert y

.

T h en t h ere i s t h e f

act t h at t h e v i ct i

m ’ s b o dy was n o t f

o un d wh ere t h e Sun s et M o t el wi t n es s es

s ugges t ed i

t wo ul d b e f

o un d. Hi s b o dy was n o t f

o un d o n Vi l l agran ’ s ran ch o r o n an y o t h er pro pert y

as s o ci at ed wi

t h t h at i n di v i dual

. T h e v i ct i

m ’ s b o dy was n o t f

o un d i n a creek b eh i

n d t h e Sun s et M o t el

o r ev en an y wh ere n ear t h e m o t el

. In s t ead, t h e b o dy was f o un d i n a pl ace t h at was n ear t h e resi den ce

o f L o pez an d Go n zal ez. A l s o

, a cel l ph o n e m at ch i n g t h e des cri

pt i o n o f t h e v i ct i

m ’ s ph o n e was f

o un d

Id. at 694. 1 3LOP EZ DI SSENT — 15

bu r i e d b eh i

n d L o pez an d Go n zal ez’ s resi den ce. A n d a b el t b uckl e i den

t i f i ed as b el o n gi

n g t o t he

v i ct i m was f o un d i n a t ub o n t h e pro pert y

. Bo t h i t em s were b urn ed, i

n di cat i n g an at t em

pt t o co n cea l

ev i den ce.

L ero y ’ s ey

ewi t n es s t es t i m o n y al s o depi ct ed L o pez, Go n zal ez, an d F ari as t o get h er o n t h e dat e

o f t h e m urder ab duct i

n g an o t h er i

n di v i dual

. L ero y al s o o v erh ead t h e t h ree o f t h em s ay

i n g t h ey h ad

“ t aken care o f s o m eb o dy

. ” M o reo v er, Go n zal ez m ade i n cri m i n at i n g adm i s s i o n s t o L ero y

, an d L o pez

m ade i n cri m i n at i n g adm i s s i o n s t o J erem

y

. It i s t rue t h at i

n cri m i n at i n g adm i s s i o n s were al l egedl

y m ade

b y Ro b l edo t o o t h ers. W e do n o t kn o w wh et h er t h e wi t n es s es wo ul d h av e t es t i f

i ed t o t h o s e al l eged

adm i s s i o n s i n co urt

. But ev en as s um

i n g t h ey wo ul d, t h o s e al l eged adm i s s i o n s were t i ed t o t h e b o dy

b ei n g di s po s ed o f by V i l l agran —wh i ch was i

n co n s i s t en

t wi t h wh ere t h e v i ct i

m ’ s rem ai

n s were

l o cat ed.

A n d wh i l e t h ere was ph

y s i cal ev i den ce l i

n ki n g L o pez an d Go n zal ez t o t h e v i ct i m ’ s m urder

,

t here was n o ph

y s i cal ev i den ce l i

n ki n g t h e v i ct i

m t o ro o m ei gh

t o f t h e Sun s et M o t el

. T he r e w a s

ph y s i cal ev i den ce l i

n ki n g T rev i n o t o t h at ro o m

, b ut t h at ev i den ce do es n o t pro v e an y t h i n g. T rev i n o

f reel y adm i t t ed t o h av i

n g us ed t h at ro o m b ut cl ai m ed i t was wee ks b ef

o re t h e dat e o f t he v i ct i

m ’ s

di s appea ran ce. A t an y rat e, t h e acc us at i o n t h at T rev i n o h ad s o m et h i

n g t o do wi

t h t h e v i ct i

m ’ s deat h

was recan t ed, an d t h ere was n o ph

y s i cal ev i den ce l i

n ki n g t h e v i ct i

m i n an y way t o T rev i

n o

.

T h ere i s n o t a reas o n ab l e pro b ab i l i t y t h at t h e Sun s et M o t el ev i den ce an d t h e DNA t es t resul t

ev i den ce wo ul d h av e caus ed t h e r es ul t o f t h e t ri al t o b e di f

f eren t

.

Gi v en t h e s t ren gt h o f t h e St at e’ s ev i den ce agai n s t L o pez an d Go n zal ez, I wo ul d al s o co n cl ude

t h at an y o t h er err o rs co m

m i t t ed b y co un s el do no t

, ev en co m b i n ed wi t h t h e f ai l ure t o prese n

t t h e

Sun s et M o t el t h eo ry o f t h e cas e, gi v e ri s e t o a reas o n ab l e pro b ab i l i t y t h at t h e resul

t o f t h e t ri al wo ul dLOP EZ DI SSENT — 16

h av e ch an ged.

I respe ct f ul l y di s s en t

.

F i l ed: S ept em

b er 16, 2020

Pub l i s h