## Facts

- Amber Renée Guyger, a Dallas police officer, lived in apartment 1378 at an apartment complex with similar hallways on different floors.
- After a long shift on September 6, 2018, she parked and walked to apartment 1478 (directly above her apartment), believing it was her own.
- The door to apartment 1478 was ajar; she manipulated the lock and pushed the door open, entering a dark apartment.
- Guyger testified she heard movement, believed there was a threat inside before entry, but did not take cover or call for backup.
- Inside, she saw a person later identified as Botham Jean, an unarmed resident in his own apartment; Jean said “Hey, hey, hey.”
- Guyger fired two shots, striking Jean in the chest; he died from the gunshot wound.
- Guyger quickly realized she was in the wrong apartment, called 911, and attempted to render aid.
- A jury convicted Guyger of murder and assessed punishment at 10 years’ imprisonment; she appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt, including whether a rational jury could reject Guyger’s claim that she acted in self-defense based on a mistaken belief she was in her own apartment.
2. Whether the evidence required reformation of the judgment to criminally negligent homicide (with a new punishment hearing) because her culpability was, at most, criminal negligence.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the conviction and 10-year sentence.
- The evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to find Guyger intentionally or knowingly caused Jean’s death.
- The jury could rationally reject self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The court declined to reform the judgment to criminally negligent homicide because the jury could find a culpable mental state greater than negligence.

## Legal Principles

- Legal sufficiency is evaluated by viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and asking whether any rational factfinder could find each element beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The jury is the exclusive judge of credibility and weight and may accept or reject any portion of a witness’s testimony, including the defendant’s.
- Intent or knowledge may be inferred from conduct and surrounding circumstances, including the natural consequences of firing a deadly weapon at a person.
- When self-defense is submitted, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant’s use of deadly force was not justified; the factfinder may reject the defendant’s asserted beliefs as unreasonable.
- Criminally negligent homicide applies when the actor should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk but fails to perceive it; deliberate aiming and shooting can support intent/knowledge rather than mere failure to perceive risk.
- A jury’s selection of murder over submitted lesser-included offenses may be sustained when evidence supports a higher culpable mental state.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the murder conviction because the jury could infer intent or knowledge from Guyger’s deliberate use of deadly force and could find her mistaken-apartment and self-defense claims unreasonable in light of the circumstances, making reformation to criminally negligent homicide unwarranted.


Guyger v. State, No. 05-19-01236-CR, 2021 WL 3438073 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 5, 2021)