George Castillo v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided May 8, 2015·No. 14-15-00019-CR·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 14-15-00019-CR FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 5/8/2015 12:20:50 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK

NO. 14-15-00019-CR

FILED IN IN THE 14TH COURT OF APPEALS 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS AT HOUSTON, TEXAS 5/8/2015 12:20:50 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk

GEORGE CASTILLO, Appellant

VS.

THE STATE OF TEXAS Appellee

Appealed From the 179th District Court of Harris County, Texas Cause No. 1303207

The Honorable Kristin M. Guiney, Judge Presiding

APPELLANT’S ANDERS BRIEF

ORAL ARGUMENT IS WAIVED

KURT. B. WENTZ 5628 Cypress Creek Parkway Suite 115 Houston, Texas 77069 E-mail: kbsawentz@yahoo.com 281/587-0088 TBA: 211779300 ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL 2

STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT 2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 3

STATEMENT OF CASE 4

STATEMENT OF FACTS 5-7

CERTIFICATE OF COUNSEL 7-8

PRAYER 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 9

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 10

LETTER 11-12

1 IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

1. The appellant, George Castillo, is incarcerated in the Harris County Jail

located at 701 North San Jacinto, Houston, Texas 77002 as of the date of the filing of

this brief.

2. The trial attorneys for the State of Texas were David Bernard and Beth

Exley whose address is 1201 Franklin, 6th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002.

3. The trial attorney for the appellant was J. Sidney Crowley whose address is

440 Louisiana, Suite 2050, Houston, Texas 77002.

4. The trial judge was The Honorable Kristin M. Guiney whose address is

1201 Franklin, 18th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002.

5. The appellate attorney for the State of Texas is Alan Curry whose address

is 1201 Franklin, 6th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002.

6. The appellate attorney for Mr. Castillo is Kurt B. Wentz whose address is

5628 Cypress Creek Parkway, Suite 115, Houston, Texas 77069.

STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT

Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. § 38.1(e) and 39.7, the appellant waives oral argument.

2 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

CASE

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) 8-9

Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W. 3rd 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) 8

High v. State, 573 S.W. 2nd 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) 9

STATUTE

TEX. R. APP. PROC. 38.1(e) and 39.7 2, 8, 9

3 STATEMENT OF CASE

On January 9, 2014 the appellant pled guilty to the offense of assault upon a

family member/second. Pursuant to a plea agreement the trial court deferred a finding of

guilt and placed the appellant on community supervision for a period of five years and

assessed terms and conditions of community supervision relevant to the appellant's case.

(1CR 20-21).

On August 12, 2014 a Motion to Adjudicate Guilt was filed alleging two new law

violations and the appellant's inability to pay certain fees. (1CR 38).

On December 12, 2014 a hearing was had on the Motion to Adjudicate Guilt. The

trial court found the allegation that the appellant had caused bodily injury to a family

member, namely Maria Luna, by pushing her to the ground true. (1CR 63).

On December 11, 2014 the trial court sentenced the appellant to ten (10) years

confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

(1CR 67).

On December 11, 2014 the appellant gave notice of appeal. (1CR 69).

On December 11, 2014 the trial court certified the appellant's right to appeal.

(1CR 68).

On December 11, 2014 the trial court found the appellant remained indigent and

appointed counsel to represent him on direct appeal. (1CR 710.

4 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Prehearing Matters

The State abandoned all of the paragraphs contained in the Motion to Adjudicate

Guilt but for the new law violations involving assault on a family member, namely Maria

Luna, on July 27, 2014.

The trial court found that there had been no prior plea or admonishments as to the

enhancement paragraph in the appellant's original plea papers. As a result the trial court

found the appellant's case should be treated as a third degree felony for the purposes of

the hearing.

State's Evidence at Guilt

The appellant, George Castillo, and the State stipulated that he was the same

George Castillo who was placed on deferred adjudicated community supervision on

January 9, 2014 for the offense of assault on a family member/second. (1RR 42).

In late July 2014 Juana Garcia received a telephone call from her daughter, the

complainant. (1RR 7, 8). Without objection Ms. Garcia testified her daughter said "he

hit her" and broke her phone. (1RR 9, 10).

When she went to her daughter's apartment an hour and a half later, the

complainant looked as if she had been crying but showed no outward signs of physical

injury. (1RR 12). On cross-examination Ms. Garcia said her daughter said "Jorge" (the

appellant) had hit her. (1RR 13). Ms. Garcia identified the appellant as the person she

knew as Jorge Castillo. (1RR 7).

5 Harris County Sheriff's Office Deputy, Eddie Palvoski, hereinafter "Palvoski",

responded to a request for assistance at approximately 1 p.m. on July 27, 2014. (1RR

14). When no one at the reported address answered the door he searched the surrounding

area in vain for evidence of wrongdoing. (1RR 17). As he prepared to leave he saw a

woman's head peak in and out of the door in a frightened manner. (1RR 18, 19).

The woman identified herself as Maria Luna. She informed Palvoski that

"George" had assaulted her. (1RR 21, 23). When she removed her hand from her right

eye Palvoski saw that it was red, swollen, and partially closed. (1RR 20). Although Ms.

Luna did not wish to file a report, or give a written statement, she allowed the appellant

had thrown her to the floor face down and then pulled her up by her hair. (1RR 24).

When Ms. Luna realized Palvoski was preparing a report, she became

uncooperative and returned to her apartment. (1RR 25).

The State rested. (1RR 30).

The Appellant's Evidence at Guilt

Although trial counsel had objected to Ms. Garcia and Deputy Palvoski testifying

about what the complainant had told them about the offense under Crawford v.

Washington, counsel called the complainant to testify on the appellant's behalf.

Maria Luna denied any physical assault by the appellant on July 27, 2014. (7RR

31). The appellant had merely come to her apartment, and she refused to let him in.

(1RR 34). She explained she held her hand to her eye to shield from the sun because it

remained sensitive to light as a result of eye surgery in May. (1RR 36, 37). The surgery

6 was necessitated by the appellant fracturing her eye socket in April. This incident was

not reported to the police. (1RR 40, 41).

The appellant rested. (1RR 41).

The State rested. (1RR 41).

Ruling

The trial court found the allegation that the appellant had pushed Maria Luna to

the floor causing her pain true. The trial court found the allegation that the appellant had

pulled her hair thereby causing pain not true.

Punishment

The State presented no punishment evidence. (1RR 45).

The appellant presented no punishment evidence. (1RR 45).

Sentence

The trial court sentenced the appellant to ten (10) years confinement in the

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

George Castillo v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

George Castillo v. State (George Castillo v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)