Brown v. State

42 Citing cases

  1. Robinett v. State

    383 S.W.3d 758 (Tex. App. 2012)   Cited 29 times

    To be admissible under article 38.072, outcry testimony must be elicited from the first adult to whom the outcry is made. Chapman, 150 S.W.3d at 812.Article 38.072 requires “that the outcry witness ... be the first person, 18 years old or older, to whom the child makes a statement that in some discernible manner describes the alleged offense” and provides more than “a general allusion that something in the area of child abuse was going on.” Garcia, 792 S.W.2d at 91;Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 386 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd). Among the conditions for admissibility of such a statement is the requirement that the party intending to offer it notify the adverse party of the name of the witness through whom the party intends to offer the statement.

  2. Patterson v. State

    NO. 02-10-00350-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 19, 2012)   Cited 2 times

    Indeed, "the proper outcry witness is not to be determined by comparing the statements the child gave to different individuals and then deciding which person received the most detailed statement about the offense." Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 386 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd). Further, the child victim's statement to the outcry witness must describe the alleged offense, not just any offense.

  3. Martinez v. State

    No. 10-16-00397-CR (Tex. App. May. 9, 2018)   Cited 6 times

    The outcry testimony of a second witness is not admissible, however, when the witness merely provides additional details regarding the same instance of sexual abuse. Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 387 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd) ("[B]efore more than one outcry witness may testify, it must be determined the outcry concerned different events and was not simply a repetition of the same event told to different individuals."); Broderick v. State, 35 S.W.3d 67, 73 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000, pet. ref'd) ("[T]he proper outcry witness is not to be determined by comparing statements the child gave to different individuals and then deciding which person received the most detailed statement about the offense."). C. Valerie Perez's Testimony

  4. Eldred v. State

    431 S.W.3d 177 (Tex. App. 2014)   Cited 34 times
    Noting that the discernibility standard in Garcia does not require the "how, when, and where"

    The medical records also indicate that Keilburg's mother claimed to have called Eldred and that Eldred denied the allegations. We review a trial court's decision to admit testimony from an outcry witness for an abuse of discretion. Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 385 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd); Tear v. State, 74 S.W.3d 555, 558 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2002, pet. ref'd). A trial court does not abuse its discretion unless the trial court's decision is outside the zone of reasonable disagreement.

  5. Hernandez v. State

    NO. 02-14-00262-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 15, 2016)   Cited 5 times

    See Hanson v. State, 180 S.W.3d 726, 730 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, no pet.); Sims v. State, 12 S.W.3d 499, 500 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1999, pet. ref'd); Reed v. State, 974 S.W.2d 838, 841-42 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, pet. ref'd). But see Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 386 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd); Seeger v. State, No. 12-09-00145-CR, 2010 WL 2998750, at *3 (Tex. App.—Tyler July 30, 2010, pet. ref'd) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Here, however, Appellant specifically filed a motion requesting an article 38.072 hearing.

  6. Berg v. State

    No. 01-22-00248-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 31, 2023)   Cited 5 times

    More than one outcry witness may be designated if the child has been the victim of more than one sexual assault and the outcry witnesses are not testifying about the same event. Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 387 (Tex. App.- Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd). Multiple outcry witnesses may testify only if it is determined that "the outcry concerned different events and was not simply a repetition of the same event told to different individuals."

  7. Trevino v. State

    NUMBER 13-19-00385-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 17, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    An outcry statement is sufficient if a child tells someone "how, when, and where" an offense occurred. Eldred v. State, 431 S.W.3d 177, 183-84 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2014, pet. ref'd); Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 386 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd). see, e.g., Castelan v. State, 54 S.W.3d 469, 475-76 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2001, no pet.) (finding that the child's grandmother was not a proper outcry witness because child's statement that defendant "put his thing in through the back" did not relay specific details of abuse).

  8. Garcia v. State

    NO. 03-14-00269-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 22, 2016)   Cited 7 times

    Thus, in cases where a child has been victim to more than one instance of sexual assault, multiple outcry witnesses may testify about separate acts of abuse committed by the defendant against the child. See Lopez v. State, 343 S.W.3d 137, 140 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); Villalobos, 2015 WL 5118369, at *3; Cruz-Romero v. State, No. 12-14-00090-CR, 2015 WL 1823582, at *2 (Tex. App.—Tyler Apr. 22, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Hernandez v. State, No. 05-12-01118-CR, 2014 WL 1178303, at *3 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 21, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 387 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd); Tear v. State, 74 S.W.3d 555, 559 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2002, pet. ref'd). Here, we will assume without deciding that the trial court erred in admitting the challenged testimony because a review of the record shows that appellant did not suffer harm from the admission of the testimony of E.G.'s mother or E.G.'s counselor.

  9. Alexander v. State

    No. 06-10-00053-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 9, 2010)   Cited 1 times

    In cases involving certain sex crimes against children, Article 38.072 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provides an exception to the hearsay rule for testimony by "outcry witnesses" when specific requirements are met. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 38.072 (Vernon Supp. 2010); Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 385 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd). An outcry witness is the first person, eighteen years of age or older, other than the defendant, to whom the child victim made a statement about the offense.

  10. Dorsey v. State

    No. 03-10-00039-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 30, 2010)   Cited 4 times
    Concluding that defendant failed to preserve complaint about failure to conduct reliability hearing by not raising objection at trial

    Because outcry witnesses are event-specific, the hearsay exception permits testimony of multiple outcries if they regard "discrete occurrences" or "discrete events" of abuse and are not merely a repetition of the same event told to different individuals. See Brown v. State, 189 S.W.3d 382, 387 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2006, pet. ref'd); Hernandez, 973 S.W.2d at 789. We review the admission of outcry-witness testimony under an abuse-of-discretion standard.