safe release instruction in Texas

2009See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.42 (d) (Vernon Supp. 2009); Milner v. State , 263 S.W.3d 146, 148 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

2009See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.42 (d) (Vernon Supp. 2009); Milner v. State, 263 S.W.3d 146, 148 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

2004Despite the court’s instruction in Garcia v. State, 57 S.W.3d 436, 440 (Tex.Crim.App.2001), we cannot possibly imagine a strategic motivation for the failure of appellant’s counsel to secure a jury instruction on mitigation for voluntary release of the complainant in a safe place.

2004Despite the court = s instruction in Garcia v. State , 57 S.W.3d 436, 440 (Tex. Crim .

2011See Storr v. State, 126 S.W.3d 647, 653 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet ref’d) (appellate court held it “inconceivable” that counsel could have some trial strategy for not requesting an instruction on safe release where the evidence conclusively established that the defendant voluntarily released the complainant in a safe place).

2009App. 2005) (considering counsel = s failure to object to prosecutor = s misstatement of law that defendant = s sentences could not be stacked even though counsel knew prosecutor had filed a motion to cumulate sentences); Storr v. State , 126 S.W.3d 647 , 652 B 53 (Tex. App. C Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. ref = d) (concluding case was A rare instance when there is no trial strategy that can explain the failure of appellant = s trial counsel to request a safe release instruction @ in punishment phase of kidnapping trial when evidence conclusively established defendant voluntarily released vic

2015However, there are also facts that arguably show that J.G. was not released in a safe place: • J.G. was returned to the same place that she was abducted from.34 • Appellant took J.G.’s cell phone and did not return it.35 • J.G. was nine years old and was returned to a private driveway alone.36 • J.G. returned to an empty house that did not have a phone for her to call for help.37 • The driveway was “desolate” in that it was surrounded by a park and an unfinished commercial development.38 These latter facts demonstrate that the jury’s rejection of the safe-release defense was 33 See State v. Wr

2015Ct. App. 1997) (holding victim released in safe place when taken to a motel and given change to use a pay phone). 36 See State v. Sakobie, 579 S.E.2d 125, 130 (N.C.

2009App. 2005) (considering counsel = s failure to object to prosecutor = s misstatement of law that defendant = s sentences could not be stacked even though counsel knew prosecutor had filed a motion to cumulate sentences); Storr v. State , 126 S.W.3d 647 , 652 B 53 (Tex. App. C Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, pet. ref = d) (concluding case was A rare instance when there is no trial strategy that can explain the failure of appellant = s trial counsel to request a safe release instruction @ in punishment phase of kidnapping trial when evidence conclusively established defendant voluntarily released vic

2004See id. (holding appellant did not prove safe release as a matter of law because the evidence did not address several critical factors regarding this issue).

2004See id. (holding appellant did not prove safe release as a matter of law because the evidence did not address several critical factors regarding this issue).