Friday, September 13, 2024
A Parker County judge has granted a new trial for a Springtown man who was previously convicted of repeated sexual abuse of a child.
On May 23, Aniceto Turrubiates Sanchez, 38, was sentenced to 35 years in prison without parole.
Sanchez was initially arrested August 2021, after his wife found him with the victim, who was partially undressed, at their home. According to a press release from the Parker County District Attorney’s Office, Sanchez’s wife testified her husband claimed nothing happened between him and the victim, but the victim told her that Sanchez had been sexually abusing her. Sanchez’s wife took the victim to Cook Children’s Hospital where she was examined by a sexual assault nurse examiner. The victim reported Sanchez had molested her between 10 and 20 times, which led to his arrest the next day.
Sanchez told the investigator he denied sexually abusing the victim, according to the press release.
“However, what we pointed out to the jury in closing argument was that his story changed during the interview,” Assistant District Attorney Abby Placke said in the press release at the time of the conviction. “Originally, he said he came home and went to sleep. Then he said he came home and watched T.V. then fell asleep. Later, he said he was watching T.V. with the victim then fell asleep. Finally, he said he was cuddling with the victim, watching T.V., then went to sleep. We felt his hiding important details was indicative of his consciousness of guilt. Eventually, he admitted that he made a mistake, but he would never actually come out and admit what he had done.”
In June, Sanchez’s attorney filed a motion for a new trial alleging the court made an error in admitting outcry evidence that injured Sanchez’s rights. In this context, an outcry witness is a person 18 years or older who a child approaches first to allege abuse, and in Sanchez’s case, there were three of these witnesses: the victim’s mother, the nurse who examined the victim and the forensic interviewer who spoke with the victim. Sanchez’s attorney argued it was wrong to have three people testify with more or less the same information about the same incidents.
“Only one witness could and should have been allowed to testify about the digital penetration outcry, and only one witness could and should have testified regarding the alleged outcry that (Sanchez) used his penis to touch the victim’s private parts,” the motion for new trial document states. “To the extent the court allowed any duplicative outcry testimony, even if additional detail was provided, that improperly allowed the state to bolster the victim’s testimony with the rote hearsay that should have been excluded, and this was a material error likely to injure (Sanchez’s) rights.”
In July, the Parker County District Attorney’s Office filed a reply to the motion for a new trial. It stated that during the original trial, Sanchez’s trial counsel objected to the testimony of two of the outcry witnesses, but the court overruled the objection.
“Counsel for the state at trial took steps to prevent overlapping outcry testimony as well as outcry testimony from an improper outcry witness,” the reply document stated.
The reply noted that the nurse who examined the victim was allowed to testify with details of the alleged abuse not only as an outcry witness but as a health care professional testifying about the victim’s medical history, diagnosis and treatment. Also, because the victim testified with the same information as the outcry witnesses, the district attorney’s office claimed admitting the outcry evidence did not harm Sanchez.
“If the victim did testify to the same acts of abuse that (their mother), (nurse Stacey) Henley and (forensic interviewer Brittany) Lain testified to, (Sanchez) was not harmed even if the admission of the testimonies of (the victim’s mother), Henley and Lain was erroneous,” the reply states.
Furthermore, the district attorney’s office argued that new trials aren’t supposed to be allowed just because of sympathy, the belief that the defendant is innocent or a vague suspicion.
“A trial court may grant a motion for a new trial only if the original trial was not held in accordance with the law,” the reply stated. “A trial court should not grant a new trial if the defendant’s substantial rights were not affected. … Instead, the defendant must demonstrate that the first trial was ‘seriously flawed’ and his substantial rights to a fair trial were affected as a result.”
Instead of a new trial, the prosecution recommended Sanchez’s arguments be examined by the Court of Appeals, which would allow all parties to access the witness testimony and trial exhibits.
But, earlier this month, 415th District Court Judge Graham Quisenberry granted a new trial and ordered the previous conviction judgement to be vacated.
“Admission of the Lain and Henley testimony was error,” Quisenberry’s order states. “(Sanchez’s) substantial rights were likely injured by the erroneously admitted evidence.”
Subsequentially, District Attorney Jeff Swain appealed Quisenberry’s order to the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth.
“Essentially, the judge changed his mind about rulings he made during trial, so he granted this convicted sex offender a new trial,” Swain said in a press release from his office released last week. “In trial, he allowed us to introduce outcry testimony from three witnesses, who told jurors what our victim told them about how Mr. Sanchez abused her. He has now decided that ruling was in error. In our view, a judge should not grant a new trial just because he has second thoughts about a ruling he made during a trial. That’s what appeals are for. We believe the judge’s rulings during trial were correct under our state’s law, which allows for outcry testimony to be admitted in child sexual abuse cases as an exception to the hearsay rule.”
Swain added, “Lost amidst the legal wrangling in a system focused on a defendant’s rights is the fact that, unless Judge Quisenberry’s order is overturned, a teenage girl is going to have to relive the worst thing that has ever happened to her in front of yet another dozen strangers.”
Quisenberry also lowered Sanchez’s bond from $60,000 in November 2021 to $40,000, and Swain’s office requested that the Court of Appeals increase his bond.
“If we do not get pretty quick relief from Judge Quisenberry’s bond order, this convicted sex offender is likely to be released on a bond a third lower than what he had before a jury heard his case and convicted him,” Swain said in the press release. “I don’t see how his flight risk would not be increased rather than decreased now that he has seen how a jury evaluated the evidence. Also, if we prevail in our appeal of the order granting a new trial, Mr. Sanchez, at age 39, will be imprisoned until he is 74 years old. We need a bond high enough to ensure his return to face his sentence or a retrial.”
