1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 07- 366- CR B R E NDO N L E E M E DC AL F AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 355TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F HO O D CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppel l antBr endo n Lee M edcal f appeal s f r om hi s convi ct i on f ori ndecen cy w i t h a chi l d by contact . I n t w o poi nt s, he ar gues t hat hi s convi ct i on i s bar r ed by doubl e j eop ar dy and t hat t he evi den ce i s l ega l l y i ns uf f i ci entt o s upportt he j u ry ’s v e rd i c t. W e a ffir m .2 Back gr ound T h e g r a n d ju r y in d ic t e d A p p e lla n tf o ra g g r a v a t e d s e x u a l a s s a u lto fa c h ild u n d e r t h e ag e o f f o u rt e e n b y p e n e tr a ti n g th e co m p l a i n a n t’ s s e x u a l o rga n w i th hi s sexual or gan ( coun tone) and by contact i ng her sexual or gan w i t h hi s sexual o r g a n (c o u n tt w o ) a n d f o rin d e c e n c yw it h a c h ild b yt o u c h in g h e rg e n it a ls ( c o u n t 3 ). S ee Tex. Pena l C ode A nn. §§ 21. 11( a) ( 1) ( V er non 2 0 0 3 ), 2 2 .0 2 1 (a )( 1 ), (2 )( B ) ( V e r n o n S u p p . 2 0 0 8 ) . T h e in d ic t m e n ta lle g e d t h a ta ll c o u n ts o c c u rre d “ o n o r a b o u t” J a n u a ry1 5 , 1 9 9 9 . The c om pl ai nan t , A . N . , i s A ppe l l ant ’ s st eps i st er . She t es t i f i ed t haton sever al occasi ons w hen she w as i n t he f i r stand second g r ade and her m ot her
w asm ar r i ed t o Appel l ant ’ s f at her , A ppe l l antw okehe rup, t ook hert o hi s r oom , and pen et r at ed herf em al e sexual or gan w i t h hi s peni s. S he al so t est i f i ed t hat h e t o u c h e d h e rmo u t h , b u ts h e d i d n o ts a ywi t h wh a tp a rto fh i s b o d y . A. N. f urt hers t at ed th a t w h en sh e w asi n t he f i f t h gr adean d a f t erhe rm ot heran d A ppel l ant ’ s f at herhad di vor ced, she and hersi st er s p e n t t he ni ght at A p p e lla n t ’s f a t h e r ’s h o u s e . S h e t e s t if ie d t h a tA p p e lla n tt o u c h e d h e rg e n it a ls u n d e r h e r c l o th e s w i th h i s h a n d . A .N . sa i d th a t s h e fi rs t re p o rte d A p p e l l a n t’s c o n d u c t to h e r g ra n d m o t h e r, N o n a , i n 2 0 0 6 w h e n s h e w a s a n e i g h th g ra d e r. O n c r os s - e xa m i na t i on , s het e s t i f i e d t ha ts he ha d a l s o t ol d f ou r f r i e nd s i n 2005.3

She a l so s ai d t hats he h a d n o tt ol d t he di st r i ctatt or neyab outt he f i f t h gr ade i n c i d e n t u n ti l fo u r o r fi v e d a y s b e fo re tri a l . N ona t es t i f i ed t hati n e ar l y 200 6, sh e con f r ont ed A . N . ab outs pen di ng t oo m uch t i m e w i t h a n ol derboyf r om ch ur ch. She sa i d t hat A . N . br oke dow n a nd t ol d he rt hatA ppe l l antus ed t o go t o he rbe dr oom at ni ght , t ak e hert o hi s r oom , a n d “ d o th i n g s to h e r.” N o n a s ta te d th a t s h e re p o rte d A .N .’s o u tc ryto A .N .’s m ot her , C i ndy, a w eek l at er . O n cr oss- exam i nat i on, N ona t est i f i ed t hatsever al m o n t h sa f t e rA .N . m a d e h e rin it ia l o u t c r y , s h e t o ld N o n a t h a t“ t h e r e w a s f u ll penetr at i on. ” T e x a s R a n g e r Jo e H u tso n tes ti fi e d th a t at the req u e st o f t h e H o o d C o u n ty Di s t r i c tAt t or ne y’ s Of f i c e , h e s e tu p a “ c on t r ol l e d ph on e c a l l ” i n M a r c h 2006. H e exp l ai ned t hat he m et A . N . at N ona ’ s hous e, se t up t el eph on e re cor di ng equ i pm ent , an d i ns t r uct ed A . N . t o ca l l A ppe l l ant i n t he hopeof“ f l es hi ng ou tt he t r ut h oft he m att er . ” A . N . s p o ke t o Appel l anton t he phone , an d Hut so n r ecor ded t he cal l . A f ew days l at er , H ust on i nt er vi ew ed A ppel l antathi s pl ace o f em p l o y m e n t. A g a i n , h e rec o rde d th e c o n v e rsa ti o n . T h e S tate p l a y e d b o th r ec or di ngst o t he j ur y. Nei t h e r A . N . norA ppe l l antm ent i one d s ex i n t he t e le p h o n e c a ll, a n d A p p e lla n t d e n ie d h a v in g d o n e a n y t h in g w r o n g in h is i n te rv i e w w i th H u ts o n .4

Jacquel i ne H ess, a nur se f or m er l y w i t h C ook C hi l dr en’ s H ospi t al ’ s sexual a bu s e t e a m , t e s t i f i e d t ha t s hei nt e r vi e w e d a nd e xa m i ne d A. N. i n M a r c h 2006. S h e s a id t h a t A .N . t o ld h e r t h a t w h e n s h e w a s s ixo rs e v e n , A p p e lla n tp u th is peni s i n hervagi na and m outh “ al m ostever y ni ght. ” D u ri n g de l i ber at i onson g ui l t / i nnoc enc e, t he j ur y no t i f i ed t he t r i al co u rt t hati tha d r ea che d a ver di ct on cou nt s one and t hr ee butw asde adl ock ed on c o u n t tw o . T h e S ta te m o v e d to d i s m i s s c o u n ts o n e a n d tw o , a n d A p p e l l a n t’s cou ns el agr ee d t o t he di sm i ss al . The j ur y t hen r et ur ned a ver di ctofgui l t y on coun tt hr ee, t he i ndecen cy by con t actcount. The j ur y w enton t o assess puni sh m entatt en yea r s’ co nf i nem ent , an d th e t r i al co urtr end er ed j udgm ent ac cor di ngl y. D oubl e J eop ar dy I n hi s f i r st poi nt , A ppe l l antar gue s t hatdoub l e j eop ar dy b ar s hi s con vi ct i on f or i ndecen cy w i t h a chi l d because t he S t at e di sm i ssed t he aggr avat ed sexual as sa ul tco unt s aft erj eop ar dy a t t ac hed . Th e D oub l e Jeopar dy C l ause oft he U ni t ed S t at es C onst i t ut i on pr ovi des t hatno p er so n s hal l be s ubj ec t ed t o t w i ce hav i ng l i f e or l i m b i n j eop ar dy f ort he s a m e o f f e ns e . U. S. C ONST . AMEND . V . G ener al l y, t hi s cl ause pr ot ect s agai nst ( 1) a se con d pr os ec ut i on f orth e s a m e of f ens e a f t erac qui t t al , ( 2) a se con d p ros e c u ti o n for the sa m e o ffen se afte r co n v i c ti o n , a n d ( 3 ) m u l ti p l e p u n i sh m e n ts5

fo r th e s a m e o ffe n s e . Bro wnv. O h io , 432 U. S. 161, 165, 97 S . Ct . 2221 , 2 2 2 5 (1 9 7 7 ); Ex p arte Her ron , 790 S . W . 2d 623, 624 ( Te x. Cr i m . App . 1990 ) ( op. on r eh’ g) . To deter m i ne w het hert w o of f enses ar e t he sam e, w e m ust exam i ne t he el em ent s oft he a ppl i cabl e st at ut es t o det er m i ne w het hereach s ta tu te “ re q u i re s p ro o f o f a n a d d i t i o n a l fa c t w h i c h th e o th e r d o e s n o t.” Blockbur

ger v. United S tates , 2 8 4 U .S . 2 9 9 , 3 0 4 , 5 2 S . C t. 1 8 0 , 1 8 2 (1 9 3 2 ); s e e Un ite d S ta tesv. D i xon , 509 U. S. 688, 696, 113 S. Ct . 2849 , 2856 (1 9 9 3 ); Pa rr

i shv. S tate , 8 6 9 S .W .2 d 3 5 2 , 3 5 3

– 5 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 4 ). G ener al l y, t o pr eserve a doub l e j eopar dy cl ai m , a def endan tm ustobj ect a t o r b e fo re th e ti m e th e c h a rg e i s s u b m i tte d to th e j u ry . G o nza lez v. S tate , 8 S. W . 3d 640, 642 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 200 0) . A n app el l ant i s exc us ed f r om t he pr es ervat i on r equ i r em ent , how eve r , w hen ( 1) t he undi sp ut ed f ac ts s h o w t he do ub l e j e op a r dy vi ol a t i on i s c l e a r l y a pp a r e nt on t hef a c e o ft her e c or d a nd ( 2) e n fo rce m e n t of u su a l rul e s o f pro c e d u ral d e fa u lt s e rve s n o l e g i ti m a te s tate i n te re s ts . Id. a t643. I n t hi s ca se , A ppe l l antdi d not r ai se hi s doubl e j eop ar dy c om pl ai nti n t he t r i al co urt . Ther ef or e, w e m us tde t er m i ne w het hert he undi sp ut ed f ac t s sh ow th a t th e d o u b l e j e o p a rd yv i o l a ti o n i s c l e a rl ya p p a re n t o n th e fa c e o f th e re c o rd and w het heren f or ce m e n t o f us ual r ul esofpr oce dur al de f aul ts ervesno l e g i ti m a te s ta te i n te re s ts . S e eid .6

A l t hou gh t hi s case does n o t i nvol ve m ul t i pl e puni shm ent s, cases ana l yz i ng do ubl e j eop ar dy cl ai m s i n t hatco nt extar e i ns t r uct i ve. W e w i l l f i nd a m ul t i pl e- pun i shm entdoub l e j eopar dy vi ol at i on “cl ear l y appar ent on t he f ace of t he r ec or d” w hen t he r ec or d s how s m ul t i pl e p uni sh m ent s r es ul t i ng f r om t he com m i ss i on ofa si ngl e a ctt hatvi ol at ed tw o s e p a rat e p ena l s t at ut es , oneof
w h i c h i s s u b s u m e d i n th e o th e r. S e eBlo ckb urg er, 2 8 4 U .S . a t 3 0 4 , 5 2 S . C t. a t 1 8 2 ; Cervan tesv. State, 8 1 5 S .W .2 d 5 6 9 , 5 7 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 ), cert. denied, 5 0 2 U .S . 1 1 1 0 (1 9 9 2 ). I ndecen cy w i t h a chi l d i s a l esser i ncl uded of f ense ofaggr avat ed sexual a s s a u l t w h e n th e S ta te u s e s o n e a c t to p ro v e b o th o ffe n s e s . See, e. g. , O cho a v. S tate , 9 8 2 S .W .2 d 9 0 4 , 9 0 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 ); Cun n i ngh a m v. S tate , 7 2 6 S .W .2 d 1 5 1 , 1 5 3 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 7 ); Beltra n v. S tate , 30 S . W . 3d 5 3 2 , 5 3 4 ( T e x . A p p . — S a n A n t on i o 2000 , n o p e t . ) . F o re x a mp l e , a s we exp l ai ned i n E

lder v. S ta te, i n d e c e n c yw i th a c h i l d b yto u c h i n g th e c h i l d ’s g e n it a ls c a n b e a le s s e rin c lu d e d o f f e n s e o f a g g r a v a t e d s e x u a l a s s a u lto fa c h ild by penetr at i ng t he chi l d’ s sexual or gan i ft he sam e acti s us ed t o pr ove bot h t he to u c h i n g an d the p e n e tr a ti o n . 1 3 2 S . W . 3 d 2 0 , 2 3 ( T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 2 0 0 4 , p e t. r e f’d ), c ert. den i e d , 5 4 4 U .S . 9 2 5 (2 0 0 5 ); se e al soHutchi

nsv. S tate , 9 9 2 S .W .2 d 6 2 9 , 6 3 2 (T e x . A p p .— A u s t in 1 9 9 9 , p e t . r e f ’d , u n t im e ly f i l ed) ( hol di ng t hati nde ce ncyby exp os ur e i s a l es se r i n c l u d e d of f ens e o f7

agg r ava t ed se xua l as sa ul tw hen t he i nde ce ncych ar ge i s bas ed on t he d e fe n d a n t’s e x p o s u re o f h i s p e n i s i n t h e c o u rs e o f p e n e tra ti n g th e v i c ti m ’s se xua l or gan ) . But w hen evi den ce s upport i ng a n i nde ce ncych ar ge i s nott he sa m e a s t hats u p p ort i ng t he pr os ec ut i on f orag gr ava t ed se xua l as sa ul t , t he fo rm e r w i l l n o t be d e e m e d to b e a l e ss e r i n c l u d e d o ffen se o f t h e l a tter, an d b o th m a yb e p ro s e c u te d w i th o u t v i o l a ti n g th e d o u b l e j e o p a rd yc l a u s e . S e e, e .g ., Bo tten fi eld v. S tate , 7 7 S .W .3 d 3 4 9 , 3 5 8 ( T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 2 0 0 2 , p e t. re f’d ), c ert. denied , 5 39 U . S . 91 6 ( 20 03 ) ( hol di ng evi dence t hatshow ed a p p e l l a n t t o u c h e d v i c ti m ’s se x u a l o rga n tw i c e su p p o rt e d c o n v i c ti o n s fo r bo th a g g ra v a te d s e x u a l a s s a u l t a n d i n d e c e n c y ); Pa tters o nv. S ta te, 96 S. W . 3d 427, 432 ( Tex. A pp. — A us t i n 2002) ( hol di ng t hatt w o s epa r at e a ct s ofpe net r at i on su pport ed con vi ct i onsf orag gr ava t ed se xua l as sa ul tby pen et r a ti on a nd by c o n ta c t), a ff'd

, 1 5 2 S .W .3 d 8 8 , 9 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ); Murra yv. S tate , 24 S . W . 3 d 8 8 1 , 8 8 9 ( T e x . Ap p . — W a c o 2 0 0 0 , p e t . r e f ’ d ) ( h o l d i ng t hat d e f e n d a n tm a yb e c o n v ic t e d o fb o t h in d e c e n c ya n d a g g r a v a t e d s e x u a l a s s a u lt
w hen evi dence i ndi cat es t hatdef endan tpenet r at ed vi ct i m ’ s f e ma l e sexual or gan w i th h i s fi n g e rs a n d to u c h e d h e r g e n i ta l s w i th h i s to n g u e ). In t h is c a s e , A p p e lla n tc a n n o ts h o w t h a ta d o u b le je o p a r d y v i o l a t io n is c l e a rl y a p p a re n t fro m th e fa c e o f th e re c o rd . S ee G onzalez , 8 S. W . 3d a t643. U nl i ke Elder, on w hi ch A ppe l l ant r el i es hea vi l y, t he St at e d i d notde pen d on a8

s i n g l e a c t to p ro v e th e th re e o ffe n s e s a l l e g e d i n th e i n d i c tm e n t. S ee Elder, 132 S . W . 3d at23 . A . N . t est i f i ed t hatA ppel l antpenet r at ed herf em al e sexual or gan w i t h hi s pen i s on s eve r al oc ca si onsw hen s he w asi n t he f i r stgr adean d t hathe t ouch ed hergeni t al s w i t h hi s hand once w hen she w as i n t he f i ft h gr ade. Th us, t he i nde ce ncyco untw asnotne c e s s a ri l y a l es se ri ncl ude d of f ens e o ft he agg ra v a te d s exu al as sa ul tco unt s. I ft he St at e h ad notdi sm i ss ed t he a g g r a v a t e d s e x u a l a s s a u ltc o u n t s a n d t h e ju r yh a d c o n v ic t e d A p p e lla n to n a ll t hr ee co unt s, puni sh m enton a l l t hr ee co unt s w oul d notvi ol at e t he pr ohi bi t i on aga i ns tdoub l e j eop ar dy b ec aus e t he j ur y c oul d ha ve bas ed i t s ver di cton s e p a ra te a c ts . S e e, e .g ., Pa tters o n, 9 6 S .W .3 d a t 4 3 2 . T h e fac t t h a t t h e S tate di sm i ss ed t he agg r ava t ed se xua l as sa ul tco unt s, l ea vi ng on l y t he i nde ce ncyby contactcount, does notchange t he j eopar dy anal ysi s. W e h ol d t hatA ppe l l ant has f ai l ed t o s how t hata doubl e j eop ar dy v i ol at i on i sc l e a rl ya p p a re n t fro m th e fa c e o f th e re c o rd . S ee G onzalez , 8 S . W . 3d at 6 4 3 . W e o v e rr u l e h i s fi rst po i n t. LegalSu ff i ci ency I n hi s se con d poi nt , A ppe l l antch al l e n g est he l ega l s uf f i ci enc y oft he evi den ce t o s upporthi s con vi ct i on. W hen r evi ew i ng t he l ega l s uf f i ci enc y oft he evi dence t o suppo rta convi ct i on, w e vi ew al l t he evi dence i n t he li ght m ost f avo r abl e t o t he pr os ec ut i on i n or dert o de t er m i ne w het heran y r at i ona l t r i erof9

f a c tc o u ld h a v e f o u n d t h e e s s e n t ia l e le m e n t s o ft h e c r im e b e y o n d a re a s o n a b le d o u b t. Ja cks o nv. V ir gin ia , 4 4 3 U .S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 , 9 9 S . C t. 2 7 8 1 , 2 7 8 9 (1 9 7 9 ); Cla y to nv. S tate , 2 3 5 S . W . 3 d 7 7 2 , 7 7 8 ( T e x . C r i m. Ap p . 2 0 0 7 ) . The t es t i m ony ofa chi l d vi ct i m al one i s su f f i ci entt o s upporta con vi ct i on f or i n d e c e n c y w i th a c h i l d . S ee Tex. C ode C r i m . Pr oc. A nn. art . 38. 07( a) ( V er non 200 5 ); S c o tt v. S tate , 202 S. W . 3d 405, 408 ( Te x. App . — Te xa r k a na 2006 , p e t. re f’d ). In t h is c a s e , A .N .’ s t e s t im o n y t h a t A p p e lla n tt o u c h e d h e rg e n it a ls w it h h is han d i s l ega l l y s uf f i ci entev i den ce t o s upportt he j ur y’ s gui l t y ve r di cton t he i n d e c e n c yb yco n tac t co u n t. A p p e l l antar gue s t hatt her e i s “l i t er al l y no ev i den ce r ega r di ng” t he i nde c e n c yb yc o n t a c tc o u n tb e c a u s e t h e p r o s e c u t o rwa s u n a wa r e o ft he i n c i d e n t i n w h i c h A p p e l l a n t t o u c h e d A .N .’ s g e n i tal s w h e n sh e w a s i n th e fi fth gr adeunt i l f ouror f i ve day s bef or e t r i al ; t hus , he ar gue s, t hat i nci den tco ul d not h a v e s e rv e d a s th e b a s i s fo r c o u n t th re e o f th e i n d i c tm e n t. W hen an i ndi ct m ental l eges a cr i m e occur r ed “on orabout”a cert ai n dat e, t h e S t a t e m a yp r o v e a n o f f e n s e w i t h a d a t e o t h e rt h a n t h e o n e s p e c if ic a lly al l ege d s o l ong a s t he dat e i s ant er i or t o t he pr es ent m ent of t he i ndi ct m entan d
w i t hi n t he st at ut or y l i m i t at i on per i od and t he of f ense r el i ed upo n ot her w i se m e e ts th e d e sc ri p ti o n o f th e o ffen se co n tai n e d i n the i n d i c tm e n t. Yzagui r re v.10

S tate , 957 S . W . 2d 38, 39 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1997 ) . The gr and j ur y r et ur ned t he i n d i c tm e n t i n this ca se o n J a n u a ry 3 1 , 2 0 0 7 . T h e o ffen se o f i n d e c e n c yw i th a c hi l d ha s no l i m i t at i on pe r i od. Tex . Code Cr i m . Pr oc. A nn . a rt . 12. 01( 1) ( E) ( V er non Su pp. 2 0 0 8 ). T hus, t he S t at e coul d pr ove t he of f ense ofi ndecen cy w i t h a ch i l d w i t h a ny d at e bef or e Jan uary 31, 200 7, i ncl udi ng t he f i f t h- gr ade i nci den tab outw hi ch A . N . t es t i f i ed. W e o v e rr u l e A p p e l l a n t’ s s e c o n d p o i n t. C onc l us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d b o th o f A p p e l l a n t’s p o i n ts , w e a ffir m t h e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t. P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: G A RD N ER, H O LM A N , an d W A LKER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Nov e m be r13, 2008