Court Opinion

ID: 9637000
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 14:52:29.142112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:52.036463
License: Public Domain

*75JOHNSON, J.,
filed a dissenting opinion in which MEYERS and PRICE, JJ. joined.
During voir dire, the trial court engaged Mrs. Valdez, a potential juror, in an exchange about her experiences working with children who had been sexually assaulted. Young v. State, No. 1410-01 (Tex.Crim.App., delivered -, op. At 67-68). The essence of the exchange, which occurred in the presence of the entire venire, was that in her 25 to 30 years of working with children who had been assaulted, she had encountered no child who had been found to be lying about the assault. Anyone who has ever had a child, or been one, knows that children he, but it was not Ms. Valdez’ testimony that children never he. Her testimony was that children never he about being sexually assaulted, an entirely different proposition. Such an opinion from a person with her stated experience carries significant weight because deahng with children who have been sexually assaulted is not within the experience of most people. She, in effect, testified to the jury as no expert would be permitted to do.
I would find that her remarks poisoned the panel and were harmful and that the harm was exacerbated by the continued exchange between the trial court and Ms. Valdez after appellant’s counsel moved for mistrial. Because of that continued exchange after the request for mistrial, I would find that the harm could not be cured by an instruction to disregard.
I respectfully dissent.