Yzaguirre v. Texas (Original)

Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary

Tony Manjares, Edgar Aguilar, and appellant Jay Yzaguirre entered a house and robbed the victims. At least two of the men displayed firearms during the robbery. One of the victims testified that appellant pointed a gun at her head, and a police officer testified that appellant dropped a rifle as he was trying to escape. Appellant testified that he did not bring a gun to the robbery, that he did not hold a gun to anyone's head, and that he was not the person who dropped the rifle. At trial, the abstract portion of the jury charge included an instruction on the law of parties, but the application portion did not. Further, appellant was denied a lesser-included-offense instruction on robbery. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether it was proper, in determining whether the lesser-offense instruction should have been given, to take into account the omission of the law of parties in the application portion of the charge. Because the law of parties was contained in the abstract portion of the jury charge and was supported by sufficient evidence, it was an issue that should have been taken into account for the purpose of determining whether to submit a lesser-included offense. And because, as the court of appeals explained, there was no evidence in light of the law of parties, that appellant committed only the crime of robbery, the trial court was correct to deny the submission of the lesser-included offense. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate court's judgment and affirmed the trial court.

Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. PD-0799-12 JAY PAUL YZAGUIRRE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS ON STATE S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS COUNTY K ELLER, P.J., delivered the opinion of the Court in which P RICE, J OHNSON, K EASLER, H ERVEY , C OCHRAN, and A LCALÃ , JJ., joined. W OMACK, J., concurred. M EYERS, J., did not participate. In this aggravated robbery case, the abstract portion of the jury charge included an instruction on the law of parties, but the application portion did not. Further, appellant was denied a lesserincluded-offense instruction on robbery. We must determine whether it is proper, in determining whether the lesser-offense instruction should have been given, to take into account the omission of the law of parties in the application portion of the charge. I. BACKGROUND A. Trial

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.