ACCEPTED
03-13-00804-CR
4814987
THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
April 28, 2015 AUSTIN, TEXAS
4/8/2015 4:22:18 PM
JEFFREY D. KYLE
CLERK
Rosemary Lehmberg Travis County District Attorney
RECEIVED IN
P.O. Box 1748 Austin, Texas 78767 Telephone: 512-854-9400 3rd
Fax:COURT
512-854-9695
OF APPEALS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
4/8/2015 4:22:18 PM
JEFFREY D. KYLE
Clerk
April 8, 2015
Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk
Third Court of Appeals
P.O. Box 121547
Austin, Texas 78711
RE: Appellate Case Number 03-13-00804-CR
Trial Court Cause No. D-1-DC-11-302663
Style: Kaitlyn Lucretia Ritcherson v. The State of Texas
To the Honorable Third Court of Appeals:
Now comes the State of Texas and moves for permission to file this
letter with an additional argument and authority.
In points two and three, the appellant complains that the trial court
erred in excluding a video, which contained several self-serving
statements made by the defendant.
It is the rule in Texas that a defendant’s self-serving statements are not
admissible in evidence as proof of the facts asserted unless they are (1)
part of the res gestae of the offense or arrest, (2) part of a statement
previously offered by the State, or (3) necessary to explain or contradict
acts or declarations first offered by the State. Allridge v. State, 762 S.W.2d
146, 152 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988).
The appellant’s statements were not res gestae because they were a
narration of past events, made a considerable length of time after the
stabbing. During this time, she was able to reflect and deliberate, as seen
by the fact that she had already lied to the police about her involvement in
the stabbing. Id. at 152-53.
The appellant’s statements were also not part of a statement
previously proven by the State, since none of the statement or parts
thereof had been introduced into evidence. Id. at 153.
Finally, the appellant’s statements were not necessary to explain or
contradict acts or declarations first offered by the State because the State
had not introduced any evidence that misled the jury or left the jury with
only a partial or incomplete version of the facts. Id. Note that this
exception does not allow for introduction of self-serving statements
merely because they contradict the State’s case, since this would allow any
defendant to place his version of the facts before the jury without being
subject to cross examination. Id.
In sum, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the
video of the appellant’s statements because the statements are self-serving
and do not fall under any exception.
Prayer
The State prays that this Court grant permission to file this letter.
Respectfully submitted,
Angie Creasy
Assistant District Attorney
State Bar No. 24043613
P.O. Box 1748
Austin, Texas 78767
(512) 854-9400
Fax (512) 854-4810
Angie.Creasy@traviscountytx.gov
AppellateTCDA@traviscountytx.gov
Certificates of Compliance and Service
I certify that this letter contains 345 words. I further certify that, on
the 8th day of April, 2015, a true and correct copy of this brief was served,
by U.S. mail, electronic mail, facsimile, or electronically through the
electronic filing manager, to the defendant’s attorney, Alexander L.
Calhoun, Law Office of Alexander L. Calhoun, 4301 W. William Cannon
Dr., Suite B-150, #260, Austin, Texas 78749.
Angie Creasy