Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

229 S.W.3d 788

Laster v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 12, 2007

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 2007-07-12

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 2009

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“to fondle her on the scene, to rape her on the scene, or to steal her bicycle.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Laster v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-07-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

LEE ANN DAUPHINOT, Justice,

¶1dissenting.

¶2I must respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support Appellant’s guilt of attempted aggravated kidnapping. While I agree with the majority that there is no evidence of intent to use or threat to use deadly force, I can also find no evidence of intent to secrete Beatrice or to hold her in a place that she was not likely to be found. The evidence of any aggravating factor is also absent, but, strangely, Appellant does not challenge the sufficiency of the aggravating factor.

¶3Appellant said nothing to the children, so we have only his actions and his later written statement by which to judge his intent. The evidence shows that Appellant grabbed Beatrice around the waist. She was either riding or pushing a bicycle down the sidewalk with her brother at 10:00 a.m. on a Sunday morning in front of a church. There is no evidence that Appellant tried to remove Beatrice from the sidewalk, no evidence that he tried to pull her into an alley or behind bushes, no evidence that he had a car waiting to hide her or spirit her away, and no evidence that he intended to take her into a building.

¶4The majority seems to suggest that Appellant’s intent to secrete Beatrice or to hold her in a place that she was not likely to be found need not be proved because Appellant would not have grabbed Beatrice around the waist for any other reason. Respectfully, at least three other possible reasons exist to explain why Appellant would grab Beatrice: to fondle her on the scene, to rape her on the scene, or to steal her bicycle. The evidence of his intent to do one of these three acts is equally lacking, and his intent to commit one of these acts is equally reasonable.

¶5Because there is no evidence that Appellant’s intent was to secrete Beatrice or to hold her in a place where she was not likely to be found, I would hold that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his conviction for attempted aggravated kidnapping. I must therefore respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.

/229/sw3d/788 · .json · Public domain