William Jason Pugh v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided April 15, 2015·No. 06-14-00067-CR·Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-14-00067-CR

WILLIAM JASON PUGH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 402nd Judicial District Court Wood County, Texas Trial Court No. 22,042-2013

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley MEMORANDUM OPINION On September 12, 2013, in Wood County, Texas, William Jason Pugh was charged, by

separate indictments, with two counts of aggravated sexual assault of S.C., a child. During the

trial, evidence that Pugh committed separate extraneous offenses was admitted under Article 38.37

of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 38.37 (West

Supp. 2014). After a jury trial, Pugh was found guilty of both counts and sentenced to two terms

of life imprisonment to run concurrently.

Pugh has filed a single brief in which he raises issues common to both of his appeals. Here,

Pugh appeals from his conviction in trial court cause number 22,042-2013 for aggravated sexual

assault of a child by penetration of the sexual organ of a child younger than fourteen years of age

by his sexual organ and argues (1) that the State’s notice of intent to introduce extraneous offenses

during the guilt/innocence phase pursuant to Article 38.37 of the Texas Code of Criminal

Procedure was deficient; (2) that the trial court erred by finding the State’s extraneous-offense

evidence was “enough to find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the extraneous offenses occurred”;

and (3) that the jury instructions failed to instruct the jury how to apply the beyond-a-reasonable-

doubt standard to the extraneous offenses.

We addressed these issues in detail in our opinion of this date on Pugh’s appeal in cause

number 06-14-00066-CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude that error has not

been shown in this case.

2 We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Bailey C. Moseley Justice

Date Submitted: February 13, 2015 Date Decided: April 15, 2015

Do Not Publish

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

William Jason Pugh v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

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