## Facts

- Lon Kieferdorf Lane was charged in Dallas County, Texas with aggravated assault arising from an attack on his wife, Cindy Lane.
- Around 12:30 a.m. on January 20, 2001, the couple argued at home, and Lane repeatedly struck her head with a closed fist, causing her to fall from a chair to the floor.
- After she fell, Lane kicked her in the lower back and chest.
- Cindy Lane suffered a brain concussion, temporarily lost consciousness, and had bruising to her scalp, right temple, chest, and hand.
- Emergency medical personnel transported her to a hospital.
- The prosecution relied substantially on the victim’s out-of-court statements describing the assault, admitted through a paramedic, a nurse, two police officers, and hospital records.
- The jury convicted Lane of aggravated assault and found he used or exhibited a deadly weapon, namely his hands or feet (or both), as used in the assault.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove Lane used or exhibited a deadly weapon (his hands/feet) during the assault.
2. Whether the trial court erred by admitting the victim’s out-of-court statements through witnesses and medical records over hearsay objections.

## Decision

- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment upholding Lane’s conviction.
- The evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to find that Lane’s hands and feet, as used, were capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.
- The challenged out-of-court statements were properly admitted under applicable hearsay exceptions, including statements for medical diagnosis or treatment and excited utterances.
- Hospital records were properly admitted as business records, with the victim’s embedded statements admissible under the medical-treatment exception.
- Any arguable evidentiary error was harmless in light of cumulative evidence, including injuries and overlapping testimony.

## Legal Principles

- Legal sufficiency is assessed by viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and asking whether any rational factfinder could have found the element beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Under Texas law, hands or feet may constitute a “deadly weapon” when, in the manner of use or intended use, they are capable of causing death or serious bodily injury; relevant considerations include the nature of the blows and resulting injuries.
- Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and reasonably pertinent to that purpose are admissible despite the hearsay rule.
- Statements made under the stress of a startling event and relating to that event may be admissible as excited utterances.
- Medical records may be admitted as business records, and embedded patient statements may be admissible if they satisfy an independent hearsay exception.
- Reversal for evidentiary error requires harmful error; admission of cumulative evidence generally supports a finding of harmlessness.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the aggravated-assault conviction, holding that the attack and resulting concussion and unconsciousness supported a deadly-weapon finding based on hands and feet as used, and that the victim’s out-of-court statements were admissible under hearsay exceptions (or, at minimum, any error in admitting them did not warrant reversal).


Lane v. State, 151 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004)