Texas Attorney General

Media Advisory

Thursday, September 30, 2004

Peter Miniel Scheduled For Execution.

AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott offers the following information on Peter Miniel, who is scheduled to be executed after 6 p.m. on Wednesday, October 6, 2004. On October 12,1988, Peter Miniel was sentenced to death for the capital murder of 20-year-old Paul Scott Manier in the victim’s North Harris County apartment. A summary of the evidence presented at trial follows.

FACTS OF THE CRIME

On May 8, 1986, Peter Miniel and his friend, James Russell, Jr., went to Paul Manier’s residence at Northpoint apartments. Miniel suggested to Russell that they rob Manier. Miniel asked Russell to pretend to retrieve cocaine out of his car as a distraction. Russell went outside briefly, and when he returned, Manier was in a bedroom with Miniel.

As Manier leaned over the bed cleaning a mirror with a blanket in preparation for snorting cocaine, Miniel struck him in the back of the head with a beer mug. Manier fell to his knees and tried to cover his head, but Miniel hit him a few more times and knocked Manier on his side.

Miniel told Russell to get a shock absorber that was sitting on the table and to hit Manier with it. Russell got the shock absorber and struck Manier in the head with it four times.

Miniel told Russell he was not hitting Manier hard enough, so Miniel took the shock absorber and hit Manier in the head four or five times himself. Because Manier was not yet knocked out, Miniel told Russell to stab Manier with a knife.

Russell opened his knife, but hesitated. Miniel then grabbed Russell’s knife and stabbed Manier. Manier kept moving, so Miniel asked Russell to hold Manier down while he attempted to cut Manier’s throat. The knife was dull, however, so Miniel proceeded to stuff the corner of a blanket down Manier’s throat.

Manier suffered thirty-nine stab wounds, ten cuts and six blunt trauma injuries to his head, including a hole in his skull.

Russell stole the stereo that was in the living room, and Miniel helped load it in the trunk of their vehicle.

Miniel was arrested later in the month in Chicago. Miniel confessed to police. He admitted that after killing Manier he was disappointed to find that the victim had only twenty dollars in his wallet.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

• June 30, 1986 — A Harris County grand jury indicted Miniel for capital murder and robbery of Paul Manier.

• Oct. 10, 1988 — A jury found Miniel guilty of capital murder.

• Oct. 12, 1988 — Following a separate punishment hearing, the court assessed a death sentence.

• Jan. 22, 1992 — The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Miniel’s conviction and sentence.

• Oct. 5, 1992 — The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari review.

• June 17, 1993 — Miniel filed a state application for writ of habeas corpus.

• Dec. 15, 1999 — The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied state habeas relief.

• Dec. 14, 2000 — Miniel filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in a Houston U.S. district court.

• Oct. 29, 2001 — The federal district court denied habeas relief.

• July 17, 2003 — The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Miniel permission to appeal.

• Feb. 23, 2004 — The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari review.

• June 22, 2004 — The state district court entered an execution order.

PRIOR CRIMINAL HISTORY

Miniel committed numerous offenses in Illinois prior to the capital murder of Paul Manier. In September 1982, Miniel was sentenced to 12-months probation for retail theft. Miniel did not successfully complete the probationary period.

In November 1983, Miniel was sentenced to a year of probation for disorderly conduct, but again failed to successfully meet the requirements of his probation. About nine months later, Miniel was sentenced to one-year probation for unlawful use of weapons.

Miniel violated probation when he committed felony aggravated battery in March 1985 by striking his girlfriend with “numchuks,”a martial arts weapon. Miniel pleaded guilty and received a sixty-month probationary sentence.

In September 1985, Illinois authorities filed a petition to revoke Miniel’s probation based on a second aggravated battery of the same woman with a wooden spoon and motorcycle chain.

ProDeathPenalty.com

On October 7, 1988, Peter Miniel was convicted of the felony murder of Paul Manier.

On May 7, 1987, Peter Miniel and James Warren Russell were on the beach at Galveston when they decided to go to Paul Manier's apartment at the Northpoint Square Apartments and have a party.

After arriving at Paul’s house to procure marijuana, Miniel concocted a plan to rob him. Miniel’s co-defendant, Russell, Jr., distracted Paul by telling him he was going to get cocaine. Paul cleaned a small mirror to use to snort the cocaine.

When Paul leaned over the mirror, Miniel struck him on the back of the head with a beer mug. Miniel continued to strike Paul until he fell to the ground. When Russell returned, he joined Miniel and struck Paul several times with a shock absorber that was nearby, resulting in six skull fractures.

Dissatisfied with Russell’s efforts, Miniel took the shock absorber and began striking Paul with it. When Miniel could not knock out Paul, he stabbed Paul 39 times with a small knife in the back and neck. Thirteen of the stabs were shallow wounds on the victim's neck, suggesting the victim had been tortured.

After this proved ineffective, Miniel attempted to slit Paul's throat while Russell held him. Finally, Miniel attempted to asphyxiate Paul by shoving a blanket down his throat.

After the murder, Miniel became angry when he realized that he had killed Paul for only twenty dollars. Miniel and Russell searched the apartment for drugs or money but all they could find to steal was stereo equipment. They washed off Paul’s blood and hid the knife. Afterwards, Miniel and Russell went to Burger King to eat hamburgers.

Miniel fled to Indiana and then to Chicago where he was arrested on May 22, 1986, while in possession of a sawed-off single-barrel shotgun. Part of the stolen stereo system was recovered in Chicago from a neighbor who bought it from Miniel for $100. The rest of the stereo was recovered in Huntsville, Texas after Minier gave police an oral confession.

Russell, who fled to Brookshire, Texas following the murder, testified against Miniel in exchange for a 50-year prison sentence for murder with a deadly weapon. A jury convicted Miniel of capital murder. On October 10, 1988, the jury took only five minutes of deliberation time to return a guilty verdict. Miniel had prior convictions in Illinois for theft, disorderly conduct, unlawful possession of a weapon and aggravated battery for beating up his girlfriend with martial arts sticks. Two days later, Miniel showed no emotion when the jury sentenced him to death.

UPDATE: Texas put an Illinois man to death by lethal injection on Wednesday for killing a Houston-area man and robbing his apartment in 1986. Peter Miniel, 42, was condemned for killing Paul Manier, 20, with an accomplice on May 9, 1986 in Manier's apartment and stealing $20 and a stereo. Miniel and James Russell beat Manier with a beer mug and an automobile shock absorber, stabbed him 39 times with a knife and suffocated him with a blanket. Miniel pleaded not guilty at his 1988 trial, while Russell pleaded guilty and testified against him in exchange for a 50-year sentence. The jury convicted Miniel of murder after five minutes' deliberation. Miniel has told Texas newspapers in recent weeks that he lied at his trial and is guilty of Manier's murder. In a final statement while strapped to a gurney in the death chamber, Miniel prayed. "Into your hands, oh Lord, I commence my spirit. Amen," he said.

Texas Execution Information Center by David Carson

Txexecutions.org

Peter J. Miniel, 42, was executed by lethal injection on 6 October 2004 in Huntsville, Texas for the robbery and murder of a 20-year-old man.

On 9 May 1986, Miniel, then 23, and James Russell, 21, were at the Houston-area apartment of Paul Manier, 20. Miniel suggested to Russell that they rob Manier. Russell then told Manier that he was going out to his car to get some cocaine. Manier began cleaning a mirror to use for snorting the cocaine.

As he was occupied with cleaning the mirror, Miniel came behind him and struck him on the back of the head with a beer mug. He kept hitting Manier until he fell to the ground. Russell then took an automobile shock absorber and hit Manier on the head. When Russell could not knock Manier out, Miniel took the shock absorber and kept beating the victim.

Russell then opened a small knife. Miniel grabbed the knife and stabbed Manier several times with it. When this also proved ineffective in subduing the victim, Miniel asked Russell to hold Manier down while he attempted to slit his throat. The knife was dull, however, so Miniel then asphyxiated Manier by stuffing a blanket down his throat. Manier suffered six blunt trauma injuries to his head, 39 stab wounds, and ten cuts.

Next, Miniel and Russell stole the victim's wallet, which contained $20. They searched the apartment for drugs and money, but could not find any, so they took the victim's stereo equipment. They then cleaned the knife and hid it, then went out to eat. Later, Miniel fled to Indiana, then to Illinois. Miniel was arrested in Chicago two weeks later. Russell was arrested in Brookshire, Texas.

Miniel had a previous felony conviction in Illinois for aggravated battery. He was sentenced to six months' probation. He also had misdemeanor convictions in Illinois for shoplifting and weapons violations. Miniel was offered a plea bargain in which he would be spared the possibility of execution, but he turned the deal down, preferring instead to go to trial and face a jury. Miniel pleaded innocent, but Russell testified against him. Also, the prosecution showed that some of the victim's stereo equipment was recovered from a neighbor of Miniel's in Chicago.

A jury convicted Miniel of capital murder in October 1988 and sentenced him to death. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence in January 1992. All of his subsequent appeals in state and federal court were denied.

James Warren Russell Jr. was also charged with capital murder, but he accepted a 50-year sentence for murder in exchange for his testimony against Miniel.

In a death row interview the week before his execution, Miniel confessed to the murder for the first time. "We got into a fight," Miniel said of the murder. "I don't remember everything, but I know the other guy started stabbing him and he wouldn't die. I started hitting him with the absorber ... One thing led to another. We shouldn't have done that. It was wrong. We were very high and drunk. That was my main problem."

Miniel said that events in his family life contributed to his life of violence and crime. "I grew up with a lot of animosity, a lot of anger," he said. Miniel told his attorneys not to seek any final appeals on his behalf. "I've been locked up 18 years ... I want to get this over with." He said that his upcoming execution would be "a relief." "Years ago, when I first went to trial, I said I was not guilty of the crime," Miniel said. "I lied. I want to tell the truth. I am guilty. I was wrong. I want to pay the price I was supposed to." "I've learned from all my mistakes in the past. I'm sorry for what I've done in the past and I want my future to be more peaceful in a better place. I believe in doing good now," Miniel said. He added, "I want to apologize to the family members of the deceased. I would like to make peace with them if possible."

At his execution, Miniel made no such apology, nor did he even make eye contact with the victim's family. His last statement was brief: "Into your hands, Oh Lord, I commence my spirit. Amen." He was pronounced dead at 6:22 p.m.

Condemned inmate executed for Houston slaying

Dallas Morning News

AP - Tuesday, October 6, 2004

HUNTSVILLE, Texas – Condemned inmate Peter Miniel was executed Wednesday evening for the beating and stabbing death of a Houston man 18 years ago.

"Into your hands, oh Lord, I commence my spirit. Amen. I'm ready," Miniel said in a brief statement. As the drugs began taking effect, he said he felt a burning sensation. Then he gasped and sputtered before losing consciousness. Ten minutes later, at 6:22 p.m he was pronounced dead. He never made eye contact with any of the witnesses, including the parents and two brothers of his victim.

Miniel, 42, had welcomed the execution and asked his attorney to file no more appeals. "I'm ready for them to get me," Miniel said in a recent interview. "I'm ready to pay the price."

Miniel, convicted of the slaying 18 years ago of a Houston man who was beaten and stabbed and then robbed of a stereo and $20, would be the 15th Texas prisoner executed this year and the second in as many days.

Second inmate to face death chamber tonight

By Kelly Prew - The Huntsville Item

October 6, 2004

HUNTSVILLE - Peter J. Miniel is set to die tonight, and has chosen not to seek further appeals. He was convicted in 1988 for the May 1986 murder and robbery of 20-year-old Paul Manier at Manier's North Harris County apartment.

Miniel has confessed to the crime, in which he and a co-defendant James Russell attacked Manier, striking him in the head with a heavy glass beer mug, stabbing him 39 times in the neck and back and beating him about the head with an automobile shock absorber. The two made off after the murder with a stereo system and $20.

In an interview from death row last week, Miniel said it was time to be honest about the crime that has kept him on death row for 18 years. "I wanted to talk to the family for many years," Miniel said. "Basically, I wasn't going to beg for their forgiveness, but I wanted to apologize and apologize to the courts because I originally pleaded not guilty. "It was originally like a fight, but it should have never escalated that far. I don't remember everything, but I know the other guy started stabbing him and he wouldn't die. I started hitting him with the absorber."

Miniel said events in his family life led him to a life of violence and trouble with the law from an early age. He said he knew he had problems, but never really knew where to turn for help. "I grew up with a lot of animosity, a lot of anger. I've made my peace," he said. "I think we all have a purpose, and when we die, we can start another life. I asked my attorney two months ago to stop fighting. I felt like it was my time."

In the weeks leading up to his execution, Miniel has completed the Christian book series "Left Behind." He has asked that the state take care of his body after his execution, as not to burden his family. He will call his mother for the final time today when he arrives at the "Walls" Unit.

Texas Executes Illinois Man for 1986 Murder

Reuters News

Wed Oct 6, 2004

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (Reuters) - Texas put an Illinois man to death by lethal injection on Wednesday for killing a Houston-area man and robbing his apartment in 1986. Peter Miniel, 42, was condemned for killing Paul Manier, 20, with an accomplice on May 9, 1986 in Manier's apartment and stealing $20 and a stereo.

Miniel and James Russell beat Manier with a beer mug and an automobile shock absorber, stabbed him 39 times with a knife and suffocated him with a blanket. Miniel pleaded not guilty at his 1988 trial, while Russell pleaded guilty and testified against him in exchange for a 50-year sentence. The jury convicted Miniel of murder after five minutes' deliberation. Miniel has told Texas newspapers in recent weeks that he lied at his trial and is guilty of Manier's murder.

In a final statement while strapped to a gurney in the death chamber, Miniel prayed. "Into your hands, oh Lord, I commence my spirit. Amen," he said.

Miniel was the 15th person executed in Texas this year and the 328th since the state resumed capital punishment in 1982, six years after the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a national death penalty ban. Both totals lead the nation.

For his final meal, Miniel requested 20 beef tacos, 20 beef enchiladas, two double cheeseburgers, a pizza with jalapenos, fried chicken, spaghetti with salt, half of a chocolate cake and half of a vanilla cake, cookies and cream ice cream, carmel pecan fudge ice cream, a small fruit cake, two Coca-Colas, two Pepsi-Colas, two root beers and two orange juices.

Texas has nine more executions scheduled for this year. The next execution is planned for Oct. 12. Houston area lawmakers and the city's police chief have called for a moratorium on executions of Houston-area convicts until an examination of hundreds of boxes of evidence recently recovered in a Houston police warehouse is completed. Gov. Rick Perry on Monday rejected the request for a moratorium on executions saying existing individual reviews of death penalty cases offer adequate safeguards for condemned prisoners.

Condemned inmate Peter Miniel executed

Houston Chronicle

Oct. 6, 2004

HUNTSVILLE, Texas -- Condemned inmate Peter Miniel was executed Wednesday evening for the beating and stabbing death of a Houston man 18 years ago.

"Into your hands, oh Lord, I commence my spirit. Amen. I'm ready," Miniel said in a brief statement. As the drugs began taking effect, he said he felt a burning sensation. Then he gasped and sputtered before losing consciousness. Ten minutes later, at 6:22 p.m, CDT, he was pronounced dead. He never made eyecontact with any of the witnesses, including the parents and two brothers of his victim.

Miniel, 42, had welcomed the execution and asked his attorney to file no more appeals. "I'm ready for them to get me," Miniel said in a recent interview. "I'm ready to pay the price."

Miniel, convicted of the slaying 18 years ago of a Houston man who was beaten and stabbed and then robbed of a stereo and $20, would be the 15th Texas prisoner executed this year and the second in as many days.

Condemned inmate says he's ready for execution Wednesday

By Michael Graczyk - Denton Record-Chronicle

October 6, 2004

Convicted killer Peter Miniel says he's been looking forward to Wednesday for some time. It's the day he's to be put to death. "I'm ready for them to get me," Miniel said recently from a closet-like enclosure in the visiting area outside Texas' death row. "I'm ready to pay the price." Miniel, 42, would be the 15th Texas prisoner executed this year and the second in as many days.

On Tuesday evening, Edward Green III, 30, was executed for fatally shooting Edward Haden, 72, and Helen O'Sullivan, 63, during a robbery as the couple stopped their car at a Houston intersection in 1992. Green's punishment was delayed by two hours, capping a day of appeals as lawyers argued the punishment should be put off because of a series of problems at the Houston police crime lab. Green's attorneys, two state senators from Harris County and the Houston police chief wanted executions stopped for all county cases until authorities can review some 280 recently discovered boxes of evidence that had been mislabeled and improperly stored.

Although prosecutors insisted all evidence in his case had been accounted for, evidence relevant to Green's case could be among the files in the boxes, Green's lawyers contended. "The integrity of the state's criminal justice system is better served by the exercise of caution, which will result only in several months delay than the state's shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later approach," defense lawyer David Dow said in an appeal that eventually was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Some 30 minutes later, Green was pronounced dead after apologizing to his family and relatives of his victims "for all the pain I've caused you."

No similar appeals effort was anticipated Wednesday in the case of Miniel, condemned for the slaying 18 years ago of a Houston man, Paul Manier. Manier, 20, was fatally beaten with a car shock absorber and a beer mug and stabbed repeatedly with a knife. Miniel asked that his attorneys file no additional appeals to delay the lethal injection.

In an interview last month, he disclosed to The Associated Press his claims of innocence from his arrest through his trial and beyond were bogus. "I lied," he said. "I want to tell the truth. I am guilty. I was wrong. I want to pay the price I was supposed to," he said.

A Houston jury in 1988 took only five minutes to decide the guilt of Miniel, who grew up in Rock Falls, Ill., and who came to Houston in the mid 1980s for a job that didn't materialize. In Illinois, he had convictions for theft, disorderly conduct and unlawful use of weapons. At the time of the Texas slaying, he was on 60 months' probation for aggravated battery and Illinois authorities had filed a petition to revoke the probation for a second similar charge involving the beating of his girlfriend with a wooden spoon and motorcycle chain.

According to court documents, Miniel and a companion, James Warren Russell Jr., went to Manier's house May 9, 1986, to get some marijuana, then offered him some cocaine. As Manier leaned over a small mirror he was preparing to use to snort the drug, Miniel repeatedly hit Manier in the head with a glass beer mug. Then Meniel and Russell grabbed a shock absorber that was nearby and continued to beat the victim.

When Manier remained conscious, court records show Miniel stabbed him nearly 40 times with a small knife, tried slitting his neck and tried to asphyxiate him by jamming a blanket down this throat. They took a stereo and his wallet containing $20, then went to eat at a Burger King.

Miniel was arrested about two weeks later in Chicago, where he sold some of the stereo to a neighbor. Russell was arrested in Brookshire, west of Houston, took a plea deal for a 50-year prison term and testified against his partner. "We got into a fight. The fight turned into a killing," Miniel said. "One thing led to another. We shouldn't have done that. It was wrong. We were very high and drunk. That was my main problem."

Anthony Manier, who was 12 when his older brother was killed, said he planned to attend the execution with his parents. "It's just going to let me know he's getting what they gave him," Manier said. "What he deserves is nothing what he's getting. He's getting the easy way out... He's going to sleep and that's it. I hope he realizes that he got off so lucky."

Manier said his parents were hoping Miniel said nothing to them from the death chamber gurney. "The way my mom and dad feel, he can admit his guilt to his maker," Manier said. Three more executions are scheduled this month in Texas, including one next week.

National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

Peter Miniel - Texas - October 6, 2004

The state of Texas is scheduled to execute Peter J. Miniel (a.k.a. Peter Hernandez) Oct. 6, for the May 1986 robbing and murder of 20-year-old Paul Manier in Harris County. According to prosecutors, Miniel, a Latino man, and James Russell robbed, beat, and fatally stabbed Manier in his apartment. The two men then left the apartment and parted ways. Miniel was arrested in Chicago on May 21.

The next day, James Russell was arrested in Brookshire, Texas for the same crime. Chicago investigators then taped a confession which became a later point of contention. Miniel maintained he was beaten and threatened by Chicago police upon his arrest leading him to confess involuntarily. Miniel stated Chicago detectives told him to say whatever officers told him to or he “wouldn’t make it.” Miniel also stated he was not notified of his Miranda rights and was refused his request to talk to a lawyer.

During the appeals process, Miniel’s attorneys also maintained that Miniel was denied effective counsel because his trial attorney did not cross- examine the co-defendant, Russell, despite the fact that his and Miniel’s stories conflicted regarding which man initiated the robbery-beating. In addition, Miniel’s trial attorney did not object when the prosecutor wrongly stated in his closing arguments that Miniel’s fingerprints were found on the object allegedly used to kill the victim.

Miniel’s case serves as an example of the arbitrariness of capital punishment in the U.S. Records show that he and James Russell acted together in a capital crime. However Russell has received a 50-year sentence because he was willing to testify against Miniel who is now scheduled to be executed. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmum once commented on the arbitrary nature of the death penalty in the following way:

“Despite the effort of the states and courts to devise legal formulas and procedural rules to meet this daunting challenge, the death penalty remains fraught with arbitrariness, discrimination, caprice, and mistake.”

Miniel v. State, 831 S.W.2d 310 (Tex.Crim.App. 1992) (Direct Appeal).

Defendant was convicted in the 337th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Johnny Kolenda, J., of capital murder, was sentenced to death, and he appealed. The Court of Criminal Appeals, Overstreet, J., held that: (1) evidence established that defendant's confession was voluntary; (2) defendant was not entitled to jury instruction on lesser included offense of murder; (3) failing to include instruction regarding intoxication as mitigating factor in jury charge at punishment was not error; (4) evidence supported jury's finding at punishment phase that defendant would be continuing threat to society; and (5) defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel. Affirmed. McCormick, P.J., Clinton, Campbell and Benavides, JJ., concurred in result.

Based upon testimony at trial from a co-defendant, the decedent's roommate, and police officers who witnessed appellant's electronically recorded oral confession, we observe that on May 8, 1986 appellant and the co-defendant drove to Galveston, Texas and met the decedent's roommate and another young man.

The four young men discussed obtaining some marijuana and agreed to follow one another back to the Houston, Texas area for such purpose. After they arrived at decedent's (and his roommate's) apartment, marijuana was obtained and smoked. The decedent was at home when the group of four arrived and he took part in the smoking. Some of the group, including appellant and the decedent, also "shotgunned" beer. [FN2]

Eventually the group wound down to appellant, his co-defendant, the decedent, and the decedent's roommate. In fact, the roommate had "passed out" and gone to sleep in his separate bedroom. Appellant's and his co-defendant's versions differ somewhat regarding who initiated the idea of robbery and who was primarily responsible for certain specific acts.

The testimony, however, establishes that the two of them, at least in concert of mind, physically attacked the decedent and robbed him of his money, wallet and stereo audio equipment components. This physical attack consisted of at least one bash to the back of the head with a beer mug, several poundings about the head with a shock absorber, and multiple stabbings and cuttings with a knife (which according to the assistant medical examiner's testimony resulted in a total of 49 wounds). This attack caused the decedent's death.

Decedent's roommate somehow managed to remain asleep in his separate bedroom during the attack. Appellant and the co-defendant left the apartment and eventually parted ways. Appellant was arrested on May 21, 1986, in Chicago, Illinois. (The co-defendant was arrested on May 22, 1986, in Brookshire, Texas.) Interviewed there by police, appellant made the above-mentioned oral confession. Some stolen stereo components were recovered in Chicago, while other components, and the knife used, were recovered in the Houston area.

FN2. The testimony indicates that this "shotgunning" involved shaking a can of beer, or poking a hole in the bottom to cause some sort of vacuum, and drinking the beer as it was forcefully ejected under high pressure out of the can into the mouth; thus the beer was sprayed down the throat.

I. APPELLANT'S ORAL CONFESSION

Appellant's first two points of error deal with the voluntariness of his above mentioned oral confession. As noted previously, he was arrested in Chicago. This arrest was effected by several Chicago Police Department officers and two Houston homicide detectives. A pre-trial Jackson v. Denno suppression hearing was held. Appellant claims that the confession was involuntary in that it was coerced by one of the Chicago officers "grabbing him by the balls," among other things. TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN. art. 38.21 (Vernon 1979) provides that a statement of an accused may be used in evidence against him if it appears that the same was freely and voluntarily made without compulsion or persuasion. Obviously, appellant's claims aver compulsion and persuasion. Five police officers and appellant testified regarding the circumstances of the arrest and interrogation at the suppression hearing and those officers again testified before the jury at the trial on the merits.

Appellant's testimony at the hearing described his arrest as including being dragged barefoot and thrown around and involving the above-mentioned "ball grabbing," plus hair pulling, throat grabbing, profane language, racial epithets, and exhortations by one officer to not hit him in the face because pictures had to be taken. Appellant claimed that the interrogation took place in a very cold, tile-floored room at a police department substation. This interrogation purportedly involved a beating by one of the officers who had an object in his hand and kicks to the groin.

Appellant testified that further interrogation included having him remove his pants and having his "balls" grabbed again with the officer informing him that he was "never going to have no [sic] babies." Appellant claimed that this caused him to almost pass out. He stated that the interrogation continued with orders from one of the Chicago detectives to cooperate and say whatever the other officers told him to say or that he "wouldn't make it." This Chicago officer also purportedly explained that the rationale for the beating was because the "dumb" Texas officers did not know how to do things right as they did in Chicago.

Two Houston detectives arrived in the interrogation room shortly after the alleged beating. Appellant then proceeded to talk with them and give them a statement which was electronically recorded. He claims that the only reason he gave the statement was because of fear of the Chicago police. In fact, he claims that the Houston detectives even said that they could leave and go get the Chicago officers back if that's what he wanted. He also claims that the Houston detectives failed to warn him of his Miranda rights and refused his request to talk to a lawyer.

The purportedly brutal Chicago officer allegedly still made his presence felt by returning to the room and asking if there was a problem; whereupon after being reassured by the Houston officers that there was not, he left. Though appellant admitted that the officers did not write out a script for him to read, appellant claimed that he was supposed to say what the officers wanted him to say. He consistently maintained that the only reason he made the statement was because of the physical abuse by the Chicago officers and that he did not have any choice but to make it. The police officers' testimony disputed appellant's claims.

At the suppression hearing, after appellant had testified regarding the claimed coercion, the two Houston detectives and three of the Chicago officers unequivocally testified in rebuttal that there had been no such coercion or abuse. They acknowledged that appellant was handcuffed to a ring on the wall in the interview room. A photograph was also introduced which showed appellant standing shirtless immediately after the interrogation and confession. We note that while at various times appellant's attorney seemed to decry the presence of pants obscuring any potential marks of abuse below the waist, the photograph does not indicate that appellant had been the recipient of the claimed brutality.

* * * *

V. PUNISHMENT EVIDENCE SUFFICIENCY

Point of error number six avers that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's finding on special issue number two that appellant would be a continuing threat to society. As noted earlier, special issue number two asked, "Is there a probability that the defendant, Peter J. Miniel, would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society?" The jury unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt that the answer was "Yes."

Appellant claims that given the spur-of-the-moment nature of the attack upon the decedent, the fact that the decedent's roommate was not harmed, the "heavy drug usage" by all parties involved, and the intoxicated state of mind of appellant at the time of the offense, it cannot be said that the evidence supports a finding of "yes" to the second special issue beyond a reasonable doubt.

The appropriate standard of appellate review of an attack upon the sufficiency of evidence to support a jury's finding on special issue number two is whether the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, would lead any rational trier of fact to make the affirmative finding beyond a reasonable doubt. Crane v. State, 786 S.W.2d 338, 354 (Tex.Cr.App.1990) It is well-settled that in deciding punishment, the jury may consider all of the evidence adduced at the guilt stage and that the circumstances of the offense itself, if severe enough, can be sufficient to sustain an affirmative finding to the second special issue. [FN12] Stoker v. State, 788 S.W.2d 1, 7 (Tex.Cr.App.1989). Of course, the jury is free to consider a great many factors when determining whether a defendant will pose a continuing threat to society. [FN13]

FN12. At punishment, the State did offer into evidence "all the testimony, evidence, and exhibits admitted by th[e] court in the first phase of the trial."

FN13. From our review of the record it does not appear that anyone testified as to appellant's age or date of birth.

The severe circumstances of the instant offense, as noted previously during the discussion of other points, speak for themselves. We add that there was also testimony from the assistant medical examiner that the multiple neck wounds were consistent with a method of torture known as "juking." The State presented testimony from five witnesses during punishment while appellant presented three. Neither presented expert psychiatric or psychological evidence. [FN14] The State's witnesses included two Illinois prosecutors and two Illinois probation officers. They identified appellant as an individual who had been convicted and sentenced for the offenses of aggravated battery, unlawful use of weapons, disorderly conduct and retail theft, and who had a bad reputation for violence.

There was also testimony that Illinois had an outstanding motion to revoke appellant's probation, alleging the commission of another aggravated battery which purportedly involved him beating his girlfriend with a motorcycle chain and a decorative wooden spoon. (Testimony indicated that the initial aggravated battery for which he was sentenced and placed on probation involved beating the same girlfriend with "numchuks [sic]," a martial arts instrument.) An officer with the Humble, Texas Police Department testified that appellant's reputation for being peaceful and law-abiding and for being violent was bad.

Appellant presented testimony from a Harris County Sheriff's Department jailer that he had no disciplinary problems while incarcerated pending trial. Appellant's two other witnesses, one of whom was an assistant chaplain at the Harris County Jail and the other who had been a prospective juror in this very case, testified about religious conversations that they had in visiting him in jail and his very regular attendance at voluntary worship services there.

Appellant had tearfully related that while he was incarcerated God had changed his life. The assistant chaplain, who had many years of experience ministering to prisoners locally and in the Texas Department of Corrections, expressed the opinion that appellant's conversion was sincere and that he had "a true commitment to repent from his life."

FN14. We note that the prosecutor did read into the record that the State had anticipated calling a particular doctor as a witness, but that the doctor's wife died over the weekend and it was not possible for him to appear. The prosecutor added that there was another named doctor who might be called in rebuttal.

There was also testimony before the jury that when arrested in Chicago, appellant had a loaded shotgun within arm's reach, and that shortly after he and his co-defendant had made their getaway he had pointed a shotgun in the general direction of his co-defendant and threatened to kill him for messing up and not doing anything right. In Kunkle, 771 S.W.2d at 449, we said that we must first look at the facts of the crime itself and if the offense is shown to be sufficiently cold-blooded or calculated, then the facts of the offense alone may support a finding that the defendant will pose a continuing threat to society.

However, if the facts of the case are not sufficiently compelling, we must look for other evidence to support the jury's finding. After making such an examination, we hold that the evidence adduced at trial was quite sufficient to support the jury's finding on special issue number two and we therefore overrule point six.

* * * *

In viewing the totality of appellant's representation at trial, we hold that the assistance of counsel was certainly within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance and that the above-noted challenged actions could surely be considered sound trial strategy. Accordingly, we overrule point of error number nine. Having reviewed all of appellant's points of error the judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed.

  

Peter J. Miniel