## Facts

- Markieth Tyrone Granger was charged with murder under Tex. Penal Code § 19.02(b)(1)–(2) after a shooting outside a Dallas nightclub in the early hours of February 4, 1995.
- Granger and companions were ejected from the club; a security guard later heard gunshots and saw Granger and another man by a car across the street with arms extended toward the car as additional shots were fired.
- The guard initially thought the men were shooting into an empty car, but then saw a person in the driver’s seat; the victim died from multiple gunshot wounds.
- Granger gave statements to police, initially attributing the shooting to his companion, later admitting involvement.
- At trial, Granger testified he believed the car was unoccupied and that he was shooting only at an empty vehicle.
- Granger requested an affirmative jury instruction on mistake of fact under Tex. Penal Code § 8.02, arguing his belief negated the culpable mental state for murder.
- The trial court refused the instruction; the intermediate appellate court affirmed on the ground that the claimed belief was not reasonable.

## Issues

1. Whether, when there is some evidence that the defendant acted under a mistaken belief negating culpability, the trial court must submit a Tex. Penal Code § 8.02 mistake-of-fact instruction.
2. Whether the trial judge may withhold the § 8.02 instruction by deciding the defendant’s alleged mistaken belief was unreasonable as a matter of law, or whether reasonableness is for the jury.

## Decision

- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the intermediate appellate court’s judgment.
- The court held the trial court erred by refusing the requested mistake-of-fact instruction.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- Under Tex. Penal Code § 8.02(a), mistake of fact is a defense if the actor formed a reasonable mistaken belief about a fact and that mistake negated the kind of culpability required for the offense.
- A defendant is entitled to a defensive instruction if there is some evidence, from any source, on each element of the defense that would support a rational inference in the defendant’s favor.
- In deciding whether to submit a defensive issue, the trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant and must not weigh credibility or resolve conflicts; the defendant’s testimony alone can be enough to raise the defense.
- Once some evidence raises mistake of fact, the reasonableness of the mistaken belief is a fact question for the jury, not a threshold screening determination for the judge.

## Conclusion

Because some evidence supported that Granger actually believed the car was empty and that such a belief, if found reasonable, could negate the mental state for murder, the jury should have been instructed on mistake of fact; withholding the instruction was reversible error.


Granger v. State, 3 S.W.3d 36 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)