Jason Bernard Miller v. The State of Texas Appeal from Criminal District Court 2 of Tarrant County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-16-00377-CR JASON BERNARD MILLER, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 2 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1419971D, Honorable Wayne F. Salvant, Presiding September 5, 2017 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. Jason Bernard Miller (appellant) appeals his convictions for murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, namely a motor vehicle. Through a single issue, he contends that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence a recording of his conversation with a paramedic. According to the record, appellant was fleeing the police when the stolen car he drove collided with another vehicle. The driver of the other vehicle was killed while the passenger was injured. Medical personnel appeared at the scene to render aid. One of those personnel was a paramedic assigned the task of assessing appellant’s medical condition. While conducting that assessment, the paramedic asked appellant questions, which led to appellant uttering rather incriminating responses. Furthermore, the conversation was occurring in proximity to a police officer whose voice recorder captured the exchange. The State sought to admit the recording at trial, and appellant objected. He believed it inadmissible because, among other things, his answers to the paramedic were the result of custodial interrogation and he had not been afforded his Miranda warnings. The trial court overruled the objection. We affirm. Despite his objection to the recording, appellant did not object to the live testimony of the paramedic. The latter reiterated the contents of his exchange with appellant. That reiteration included the incriminating responses uttered by appellant. As said by our Court of Criminal Appeals, “[i]t is well established that questions regarding the admission of evidence are rendered moot if the same evidence is elsewhere introduced without objection; any error in admitting evidence over a proper objection is harmless if the same evidence is subsequently admitted without objection.” Chamberlain v. State, 998 S.W.2d 230, 235 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); accord Sanders v. State, 255 S.W.3d 754, 764 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008, pet. ref’d) (holding the complaint moot since the same testimony was admitted elsewhere at trial without objection). Because the evidence about which appellant complains was admitted elsewhere at trial without objection, his sole appellate issue is moot. Any purported error is harmless. Therefore, we overrule the issue and affirm the judgment of the trial court. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 2
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.
