mistake of fact defense in Texas

2017See, e.g., In re S.S., 167 S.W.3d 108 , 112–14 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, no pet.) (State met its burden of disproving the defense where it presented sufficient evidence disproving juvenile’s mistake-of-fact defense in trespass case); Bruno v. State, 812 S.W.2d 56 , 59–60 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991), aff’d, 845 S.W.2d 910, 912 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993) (trial court properly instructed jury that the State had the burden of disproving defendant’s mistake of fact defense beyond a reasonable doubt where defendant claimed that he mistakenly believed that he had consent to operate the victim’s vehic

2015Three other judges concurred, agreeing that “the mistake of fact instruction[ ] was unnecessary in the instant case.” Id.

2024See, e.g., Celis, 416 S.W.3d at 432 (defendant’s alleged mistake about being licensed to practice law in Mexico did not entitle defendant to mistake-of-fact instruction because “that statute does not require proof of a culpable mental state as to the licensing or good-standing elements, the mistake-of-fact instruction appellant sought did not negate the kind of culpability required for the offense”); Sands v. State, 64 S.W.3d 488 , 494–96 (Tex. App.— Texarkana 2001) (defendant alleged mistake of fact because he thought syringe contained vitamin B-12 instead of methamphetamine when statute requ

2011See generally Sands v. State, 64 S.W.3d 488, 496 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, no pet.) (concluding the absence of a mistake of fact instruction did not deprive appellant of the right to have the jury consider her defense).

2017However, “if the evidence viewed in a light favorable to appellant does not establish a mistake of fact defense, an instruction is not required.” Granger, 3 S.W.3d at 38 .

2015“If the evidence viewed in a light favorable to appellant does not establish a mistake of fact defense, an instruction is not required.” Id.

2026Critically, the mistake-of-fact defense “applies only with respect to elements that require proof of a culpable mental state.” Celis, 416 S.W.3d at 430 ; TEX.

2024See, e.g., Celis, 416 S.W.3d at 432 (defendant’s alleged mistake about being licensed to practice law in Mexico did not entitle defendant to mistake-of-fact instruction because “that statute does not require proof of a culpable mental state as to the licensing or good-standing elements, the mistake-of-fact instruction appellant sought did not negate the kind of culpability required for the offense”); Sands v. State, 64 S.W.3d 488 , 494–96 (Tex. App.— Texarkana 2001) (defendant alleged mistake of fact because he thought syringe contained vitamin B-12 instead of methamphetamine when statute requ

2024See Murchison v. State, 93 S.W.3d 239, 252 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, pet. ref’d).

2020See Murchison, 93 S.W.3d at 252 ; Gant, 814 S.W.2d at 452–53. 27 Yet, even if the trial court’s refusal to give a mistake-of-fact instruction on the securities-fraud count constituted error, the error would be harmless and so provide no basis for appellate relief.

2013CELIS CONCURRENCE — 8 mistake must negate a culpable mental state required for the charged offense.25 And at least two cases from this Court since the 1974 enactment have held the mistake-of-fact defense to be inapplicable when the mistake was about an element of the offense for which there was no culpable mental state.26 In Billy Ray Green v. State, the defendant was charged with public lewdness, occurring in a booth in an adult bookstore.27 The defendant contended that he was entitled to the defense of mistake of fact because there was evidence that he was mistaken about whether the booth wa

2010Granger v. State, 3 S.W.3d 36, 41 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (the mistake of fact, by its terms, negates the culpable mental state); Willis v. State, 790 S.W.2d 307, 314 (Tex.Crim.App.1990) (the good faith purchase defense may, by its terms, negate the culpable mental state); Jackson v. State, 646 S.W.2d 225, 227 (Tex.Crim.App.1983) (the mistake of fact defense, by its terms, negates the culpable mental state). .

2015The evidence will not support a mistake of fact instruction for the reasons discussed above in connection with the jury charge in the kidnapping case; namely, the alleged “mistake” was easily verifiable; accordingly any “belief” that Diana had actual custodial possession of L.A. was not reasonable, King, 919 S.W.2d at 821-22 , and the evidence, viewed in a light favorable to the defense, does not establish a mistake of fact, especially in light of Diana’s: (1) admission that Andrade had custodial possession of L.A. at the time of trial; (2) failure to show a family court with jurisdiction had

2015The evidence will not support a mistake of fact instruction for the reasons discussed above in connection with the jury charge in the kidnapping case; namely, the alleged “mistake” was easily verifiable; accordingly any “belief” that Diana had actual custodial possession of L.A. was not reasonable, King, 919 S.W.2d at 821-22 , and the evidence, viewed in a light favorable to the defense, does not establish a mistake of fact, especially in light of Diana’s: (1) admission that Andrade had custodial possession of L.A. at the time of trial; (2) failure to show a family court with jurisdiction had

2020See Murchison, 93 S.W.3d at 252 ; Gant, 814 S.W.2d at 452–53. 27 Yet, even if the trial court’s refusal to give a mistake-of-fact instruction on the securities-fraud count constituted error, the error would be harmless and so provide no basis for appellate relief.

2017PENAL.CODE ANN. § 8.02(a) (West 2011). 11 By its very definition, the mistake of fact defense must be based on a “reasonable belief about a matter of fact,” and therefore the defense is inapplicable where the “mistaken belief is not reasonable.” See Gant v. State, 814 S.W.2d 444, 451-52 (Tex. App.—Austin 1991, no pet.); see also Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787, 800 (Tex. Crim.

2013Sometimes a mistake-of-fact instruction would not be submitted to the jury: (1) when that mistake is unreasonable as a matter of law (see Mays v. State, 318 S.W.3d 368, 383 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) ("although the general rule is that the jury must determine the relative credibility of the evidence raising a 'reasonable belief' about a fact, reliance upon paranoid beliefs and delusions negates the type of reasonableness that an ordinary and prudent person would have under the circumstances”)); and (2) when there is no evidence in the record that would support a finding that the mistake was a reasona

2013Sometimes a mistake-of-fact instruction would not be submitted to the jury: (1) when that mistake is unreasonable as a matter of law (see Mays v. State, 318 S.W.3d 368, 383 (Tex. Crim.

2001Reviewing other Court of Criminal Appeals cases on the mistake-of-fact defense, we do not find any recent cases that do not require mistake-of-fact instruction when the evidence raises a mistake-of-fact defense. [3] Three of the most recent cases on this subject from the Court of Criminal Appeals involved theft of an automobile: Gardner v. State, 780 S.W.2d 259 (Tex. Crim.App.1989); Woodfox v. State, 742 S.W.2d 408 (Tex.Crim.App.1987); and Lynch v. State, 643 S.W.2d 737 (Tex.Crim.

2001Reviewing other Court of Criminal Appeals cases on the mistake-of-fact defense, we do not find any recent cases that do not require mistake-of-fact instruction when the evidence raises a mistake-of-fact defense. 3 Three of the most recent cases on this subject from the Court of Criminal Appeals involved theft of an automobile: Gardner v. State, 780 S.W.2d 259 (Tex.Crim.App.1989); Woodfox v. State, 742 S.W.2d 408 (Tex.Crim.App.1987); and Lynch v. State, 643 S.W.2d 737 (Tex.Crim.App.1983).

2017PENAL.CODE ANN. § 8.02(a) (West 2011). 11 By its very definition, the mistake of fact defense must be based on a “reasonable belief about a matter of fact,” and therefore the defense is inapplicable where the “mistaken belief is not reasonable.” See Gant v. State, 814 S.W.2d 444, 451-52 (Tex. App.—Austin 1991, no pet.); see also Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787, 800 (Tex. Crim.

2016The trial court disagreed and refused to include an instruction on mistake of fact. - Rodriguez relies on Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) and Louis v. State, 393 S.W.3d 246 (Tex.Crim.App.2012) in support of his claim that the trial court erred in refusing to include a mistake-of-fact instruction in- the jury charge.

2013Since a mistake of fact defense is available only if it negates the culpable mental state required for he commission of the underlying offense, ... such requisite mental state must pertain to the defendant's belief about the owner’s effective consent.”). . 597 S.W.2d 375 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). . 781 S.W.2d at 603 n. 2 (citing Beggs, 597 S.W.2d at 378 ). .

2013Since a mistake of fact defense is available only if it negates the culpable mental state required for he commission of the underlying offense, ... such requisite mental state must pertain to the defendant's belief about the owner’s effective consent.”). . 597 S.W.2d 375 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). . 781 S.W.2d at 603 n. 2 (citing Beggs, 597 S.W.2d at 378 ). .

2013In Traylor v. State, the Beaumont court of appeals held that the trial court properly refused to give a mistake-of-fact instruction because it "was not necessary.” 43 S.W.3d 725 , 730-31 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2001, no pet.) (holding defensive instruction that Traylor was mistaken about whether victim was police officer was unnecessary because, to convict Traylor, jury had to find that he knew the victim was police officer). • Only one other court of appeals has applied Bruno , but it did so in an unpublished decision and in the context of a harm analysis rather than an error analysis.

2013In Traylor v. State , the Beaumont court of appeals held that the trial court properly refused to give a mistake-of-fact instruction because it "was not necessary." 43 S.W.3d 725 , 730-31 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2001, no pet.) (holding defensive instruction that Traylor was mistaken about whether victim was police officer was unnecessary because, to convict Traylor, jury had to find that he knew the victim was police officer).

2018Louis , 393 S.W.3d at 253 ("Appellant was indeed subjected to [a transferred-intent] instruction[;] thus upon his request, he was entitled to have a mistake-of-fact instruction included in the jury charge."). 416 S.W.3d 419 , 431 (Tex. Crim.

2016The trial court disagreed and refused to include an instruction on mistake of fact. - Rodriguez relies on Thompson v. State, 236 S.W.3d 787 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) and Louis v. State, 393 S.W.3d 246 (Tex.Crim.App.2012) in support of his claim that the trial court erred in refusing to include a mistake-of-fact instruction in- the jury charge.

2015See Reyes v. State, 422 S.W.3d 18, 31-32 (Tex.App.-Waeo 2013, pet. refd) (holding “mistake-of-fact instruction was not essential because the factfinder would necessarily have had to reject Reyes’s defense to convict Reyes of the elements of the crime as a principal” and that “Reyes was not harmed by the failure to have his requested instruction on the mistake of fact defense submitted to the jury”); Durden v. State, 290 S.W.3d 413, 421 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2009, no pet.) (“While in some instances the denial of a proper defensive instruction would cause harm by preventing the defendant from argu

2015See Reyes v. State, 422 S.W.3d 18 , 31–32 (Tex. App.— Waco 2013, pet. ref’d) (holding “mistake-of-fact instruction was not essential because the factfinder would necessarily have had to reject Reyes’s defense to convict Reyes of the elements of the crime as a principal” and that “Reyes was not harmed by the failure to have his requested instruction on the mistake of fact defense submitted to the jury”); Durden v. State, 290 S.W.3d 413, 421 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2009, no pet.) (“While in some instances the denial of a proper defensive instruction would cause harm by preventing the defendant from

2012See Legere v. State, 82 S.W.3d 105, 109 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2002, pet. ref'd) (“Legere’s testimony, however, does not raise a mistake of fact defense.

2011See Legere v. State, 82 S.W.3d 105, 109 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2002, pet. ref'd) (“Leg-ere’s testimony, however, does not raise a mistake of fact defense.

2001In Posey , in considering the failure to submit a mistake of fact instruction and in interpreting Article 36.14, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that "... there generally is no `error' in the charge unless the defendant objects in writing to claimed `errors' of commission and omission in the charge." Posey, 966 S.W.2d at 61 .

2001In the second case, Posey v. State, 966 S.W.2d 57, 59-61 (Tex.Crim.App.1998), we held that when a defendant has not requested a mistake of fact instruction, the trial court does not err in failing to instruct the jury, sua sponte, on such a defensive issue; therefore, an Almanza harm analysis is not appropriate.

2021See Thomas, 586 S.W.3d at 421 (holding girlfriend did not violate Section 33.02 by using defendant’s passcode to unlock his iPhone and view photos because there was no proof she knew she lacked his assent to do so); cf. McQueen, 781 S.W.2d at 604–05 (explaining the application of a mistake-of-fact defense relating to authorization to operate another’s vehicle and that the trial court is free to believe or disbelieve the actor’s claim of authorization).

2013Since a mistake of fact defense is available only if it negates the culpable mental state required for he commission of the underlying offense, ... such requisite mental state must pertain to the defendant's belief about the owner’s effective consent.”). . 597 S.W.2d 375 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). . 781 S.W.2d at 603 n. 2 (citing Beggs, 597 S.W.2d at 378 ). .

2012Cf. Green v. State, 899 S.W.2d 245, 248 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1995, no pet.) (holding that mistake-of-fact instruction was warranted in theft case where the accused testified that he paid for merchandise under the belief that he had sufficient funds in his checking account). *820 In his affidavit, trial counsel attested that his failure to request the mistake-of-fact instruction was “not the result of trial strategy or tactic.” This failure fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, rendering counsel’s performance constitutionally deficient.

2012See Green, 899 S.W.2d at 248 (“For the jury not to be given the only law raised by his defense that would have favored defendant’s theory of the case is catastrophic.”); Taiwo v. State, No. 01-07-00487-CR, 2010 WL 2306040 , at * 5-6 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] June 10, 2010, pet. ref'd) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see also Anderson v. State, 11 S.W.3d 369, 375 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref'd) (holding that defendant was harmed where jury charge omitted a mistake-of-fact instruction, depriving him of the right to have the jury consider his only defense).

2010App. 1983) (the mistake of fact defense, by its terms, negates the culpable mental state). 18 Granger, 3 S.W.3d at 41 ; Jackson, 646 S.W.2d at 227 . 19 Stephen G.

2010Granger v. State, 3 S.W.3d 36, 41 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (the mistake of fact, by its terms, negates the culpable mental state); Willis v. State, 790 S.W.2d 307, 314 (Tex.Crim.App.1990) (the good faith purchase defense may, by its terms, negate the culpable mental state); Jackson v. State, 646 S.W.2d 225, 227 (Tex.Crim.App.1983) (the mistake of fact defense, by its terms, negates the culpable mental state). .

2024See Celis, 416 S.W.3d at 430 ; Miller v. State, 815 S.W.2d 582, 585 (Tex. Crim.

2023Maldonado relies on Miller v. State, 815 S.W.2d 582 (Tex. Crim.

2019Montgomery v. State, 588 S.W.2d 950, 953 (Tex. Crim.

2014See Montgomery v. State, 588 S.W.2d 950, 953 (Tex.Crim.App.1979) (“The mistake of fact defense ... is based on the mistaken belief of the accused, and it looks to the conduct of others only to the extent that any such conduct contributes to the mistaken belief.”); Lasker v. State, 573 S.W.2d 539, 542 (Tex.Crim.App.1978).

2013A mistake of fact defense goes not to the “act,” but instead to the “attendant circumstances.” Id.

2005Applying the law on mistake of fact in Gardner v. State , the Court of Criminal Appeals held that a mistake of fact instruction was proper in an unauthorized use of a motor vehicle case where the defendant alleged that he had been given permission to operate the vehicle by a third party he believed to be the owner. 780 S.W.2d 259 , 263 (Tex. Crim.

2024See Almanza, 686 S.W.2d at 171 . 10 very short and, in the balance, this factor neither supports nor disputes that Appellant suffered “some harm” without the mistake-of-fact instruction.

1998Applying this Court's opinion in Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157, 160-74 (Tex.Cr.App. 1984) (op. on reh'g), the Court of Appeals reversed appellant's conviction and remanded the cause for a new trial upon determining appellant was "egregiously harmed" by the absence of a mistake of fact instruction in the jury charge.

2021App. 2013) (quotation omitted) (reversing court of appeals and holding that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to request a mistake of fact instruction). “[J]ust because a competent defense attorney recognizes that a particular defense might be available to a particular offense, he or she could also decide it would be inappropriate to propound such a defense in a given case.” Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Vasquez v. State, 830 S.W.2d 948 , 950 n.3 (Tex. Crim.

2021App. 2013) (quotation omitted) (reversing court of appeals and holding that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to request a mistake of fact instruction). “[J]ust because a competent defense attorney recognizes that a particular defense might be available to a 6 particular offense, he or she could also decide it would be inappropriate to propound such a defense in a given case.” Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Vasquez v. State, 830 S.W.2d 948 , 950 n.3 (Tex. Crim.

2024Mistakes of fact In his first two issues, Wall argues that a hypothetically correct jury charge should have included a mistake-of-fact instruction because the jury “could have been assisted by guidance regarding the significance of Wall’s mistaken but reasonable 55 belief that the co-conspirators were armed” and that they planned to immediately kidnap K.W. “[T]rial courts are not required to include an instruction on a defensive issue, like mistake of fact, unless the defendant requests it or objects to its omission.” Flores v. State, 573 S.W.3d 864, 867 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2019, pe

2024See, e.g., Flores v. State, 573 S.W.3d 864, 867-68 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2019, pet. ref’d).

2015King v. State, 919 S.W.2d 819 , 821 – 22 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2996, no pet.); Miller v. State, 666 S.W.2d 564, 566 (Tex. App—Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no pet.).

2015King v. State, 919 S.W. 2d 819, 821 (Tex. App. – El Paso 1996, no pet.); Thibodeaux v. State, 726 S.W. 2d 601, 604 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, pet. ref’d); Miller v. State, 666 S.W. 2d 564 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no pet.).