Second Court of Appeals

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued - Week of June 6, 2016.

NOTE: Summaries are prepared by the court's staff attorneys and law clerks for public information only and reflect his or her interpretation alone of the facts and legal issues. The summaries are not part of the court's opinion in the case and should not be cited to, quoted, or relied upon as the opinion of the court.

Links to full text of opinions (PDF version) can be accessed by clicking the cause number.

Bleil v. State, No. 02-15-00120-CR (June 9, 2016) (Sudderth, J., joined by Livingston, C.J., and Walker, J.).

Held: The evidence, which showed that Appellant traded sex with her twelve-year-old daughter on multiple occasions for several months in exchange for methamphetamine, is sufficient to support Appellant’s conviction of continuous sexual abuse of a child as a party.

Pantoja v. State, Nos. 02-15-00204-CR, 02-15-00205-CR (June 9, 2016) (Walker, J., joined by Meier and Sudderth, JJ.).

Held: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Pantoja’s objections to the State’s cross-examination of his father concerning images found on Pantoja’s cell phone depicting cocaine use, guns, and other prejudicial images, including satanic images. Pantoja’s father had offered opinion character testimony of Pantoja’s good character, and the State was entitled to cross-examine him through “did-you-know” questions about any relevant specific instances of Pantoja’s conduct to test the basis of his good-character opinion of Pantoja. Pantoja’s sixty-year sentence, which is within the statutorily-authorized range of punishment, does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.