Bryant, Billy Ray

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bryant, Billy Ray. Read the opinion of the Court — 2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1877 →

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 19, 2014·No. WR-74,973-01·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-74,973-01

EX PARTE BILLY RAY BRYANT, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE NO. CR01125 IN THE 102 ND DISTRICT COURT FROM RED RIVER COUNTY

K ELLER, P.J., filed a dissenting opinion.

The habeas court recommends that relief be denied, and I believe that the recommendation

is supported by the record. By my reading of the record, (1) there is compelling evidence that

applicant is guilty even without considering Janie’s written statement and (2) the polygraph evidence

would not have changed the jury’s view of Janie’s testimony.

A. Compelling Evidence

Although some of the evidence that I will recount below was contradicted at trial and on

habeas, I believe there is a significant amount of incriminating evidence that creates a compelling

case for applicant’s guilt.

1. Relationships

Applicant was not a stranger that happened to be implicated by Mitchell; applicant had BRYANT DISSENT — 2

significant connections with members of the Victory and Raulston families. Janie, whose polygraph

test is the primary subject of applicant’s claims, is Stella Victory’s sister and Aaron, Dalinda, and

Jonathon’s aunt. Applicant was Janie’s live-in boyfriend at the time of the murders and the three

children knew him. Moreover, applicant “ran with” Kenneth Raulston, and he and Kenneth together

“jacked” Mitchell Dickey on a large amount of drugs that Mitchell had fronted out to applicant.

2. Motive

Applicant had at least two motives for killing Johnny Victory. First, on Christmas Eve,

Johnny beat up Stella, who was the sister of his (applicant’s) girlfriend Janie. Stella was also the

girlfriend of his friend Kenneth. On Christmas Day, there were a “bunch of guys” with “lots of

guns” at Stella’s house. Stella’s brothers were there, as was applicant. “They” discussed killing

Johnny. Aaron overheard applicant and Kenneth talking about killing Johnny.

Second, Johnny stole cash, barrels of expensive methamphetamine precursors, and

counterfeit money plates from Kenneth. Dalinda thought that applicant “had a fuss” with Johnny

over the things that came up missing because that’s what she had been told over the years.

3. Eyewitnesses

Several witnesses testified that applicant participated in murdering Johnny and Sarah or that

applicant was present when the murders were committed. Mitchell claimed that he, applicant, and

Kenneth drove to Johnny and Sarah’s house and parked nearby. Mitchell said he waited in the car

while applicant, who carried a shotgun, and Kenneth went to the house. Mitchell soon heard

gunshots and ran to the carport, which would have been when Stella’s children saw him. Mitchell

testified that applicant and Kenneth killed Johnny and Sarah.

Aaron testified at trial that on the night of the murders, Johnny was carrying him up to the BRYANT DISSENT — 3

house. When Johnny set him down, Aaron heard a shot and he saw Johnny and Sarah fall. Aaron

stopped by his dad, and then ran and hid in the carport. From there, he saw applicant and Kenneth.

Applicant and Kenneth each had a gun in his hand.1

In 2007, Dalinda gave a written statement about what happened on the night of the murders.

In it she says, “I saw a man look through the back living room window. The man had a full beard

and collar [length] hair. His hair was black. He had on a red and black checkered coat. I knew Bill

Bryant because I had seen him on several different occasions prior to that night. I remember saying

to my brothers that the man looking in the window was Bill Bryant or I asked them if it was Bill

Bryant. I did think at the time that the man looking in the window was Bill Bryant.”

When Dalinda first testified at trial, she said she did not know if applicant was one of the

murderers. The next day, as the judge at the habeas hearing put it, “in dramatic testimony in the

rebuttal, as she sat in this witness stand, she turned and pointed at Mr. Bryant identifying him as the

killer of one of her parents.” During this later testimony, Dalinda said she was scared, and that she

wasn’t even living at home because she was scared for her life and her son’s life. She had always

known it was applicant, but her mother, Stella, said it wasn’t him. Dalinda thought it was because

Stella was trying to protect them.

Dalinda worked for applicant when she was twenty-two (thirteen years after the murders) and

her brothers hated the fact that she was around him all the time. When asked why she was friends

with applicant, she said that she couldn’t act like she was scared of him because “what if he would

have killed” her if she had shown any kind of fear.

Dalinda testified more than once that she did not know if “it was him,” but she also explained

1 I have appended to this opinion Aaron’s testimony on direct examination. BRYANT DISSENT — 4

that testimony when she ultimately said that “it was him.” Dalinda testified that she knew in the

back of her mind that it was applicant, but she pushed it away. She explained that she always knew

it was applicant, but she did not want to believe it because she did not want herself and her kids to

be in danger. She said, “You have to go through something like that to understand why you would

do that. It’s unexplainable.”2

Jonathon did not testify at trial, but after the case was reopened, he told law enforcement that

there were other people present at the murders, and he believed applicant was one of them. In spite

of trying to convince the kids that “it wasn’t him,” Stella later told Jonathon that “it was him.”

4. Weapon

There was evidence that applicant was in possession of a weapon that could have caused the

murders. Johnny and Sarah were killed with a shotgun. Johnny had both birdshot and buckshot in

his head, which could have been caused by a double-barrel shotgun. Applicant sold two rifles and

a double-barrel shotgun to a man in Oklahoma a few months after the murders.

5. Threats / Statements Showing Consciousness of Guilt

Applicant made threats and engaged in conversations after the murder that suggested his own

consciousness of guilt. Before the murders, Mitchell had burglarized Kenneth’s house (where

Johnny and Stella were living) as part of an insurance scam. After the murders, Mitchell went to

prison for the burglary. Mitchell’s mother testified that three or four months after Mitchell went to

prison, applicant came to her house in New Mexico with a man named Denny Donaldson and

threatened Mitchell’s parents. Applicant told them that they’d better tell “Mitchell, little son of a

2 Dalinda remembered that Janie called applicant “Tom” because he was seeing another girl behind her back. BRYANT DISSENT — 5

bitch, to keep his mouth shut.” The reason that Mitchell’s parents had moved to New Mexico in the

first place was that, because of an earlier threat, they were afraid for their family. They were told

that applicant was going to shoot them.

One time, Dalinda was run over by a flatbed trailer, and applicant came over and picked her

up. When he did, he asked if she thought he did it (killed her father), and she said “no.” It was the

only time the murders ever came up between them.

When the capital-murder warrant against applicant was issued and it appeared in the

newspaper, applicant left home.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI