Guajardo v. State
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of felony murder, three counts of aggravated assault, and three counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime in connection with a shooting death. Defendant appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for new trial. The court held that the jury's question, regarding whether it was possible to find defendant not guilty on the malice murder count due to self-defense but still find him guilty on other counts, simply indicated that the jury was attempting to understand the law as fully as possible before reaching a verdict. Consequently, the court held that the case did not fall within the narrow exception to the inconsistent verdict rule. The court also held that defendant's claim that the trial court erred by giving incorrect instructions in response to the jury's questions was not properly preserved for review. The court further held that there was no plain error in the trial court's recharge of the jury on the subject of self-defense. Accordingly, the judgment was affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.