Having thus found error, the next question for the Court of Appeals was whether the error could be said to be completely harmless. If not, a new trial was required as a matter of Texas law.
Given that Rodriguez entire defense was based upon the justification of self-defense, and that self-defense might have been mistakenly thought by the jury to have been lost as a matter of law based upon Rodriguez’s open carry of his pistols at Fornol’s house, the Court of Appeals was obliged to “conclude that conviction was not a foregone conclusion absent the charge error, and that this factor supports reversal.”
And thus Rodriguez won himself a new trial.
Those of you will remember this case where the defendant was video-taping his argument and eventual shooting with his neighbor. I am letting Andrew Branca delve into what happened and why was the decision reversed since he gets the big legal bucks explaining stuff.
I know some think the legal stuff is not “sexy” but we need to understand how things work past pulling the trigger and what kind of manure hurricane one might be involved in after a self-defense shooting. So, pull up your big toddler pants and get yourself instructed.