Blanton v, State (Unpublished Memo): Burglary of a habitation conviction affirmed because Blanton only presented the Reporter’s Record from the first day of a three day trial. That doomed all of his complaints on appeal. The Tyler court can’t conduct legal or factual sufficiency reviews of the evidence without all of the evidence. Likewise, Blanton complains of the trial court’s handling of a question from the jury, but the court reporter’s record from that day is missing. Finally, Blanton’s complaint about the jury charge is doomed to failure as well because, even if there is error, the Tyler court would need to review the whole record to see if that error caused harm.
Although not necessary to the decision, the Tyler court does give some guidance on future burglary of a habitation cases. Blanton wanted an instruction on consent to enter the habitation, apparently on the belief that consent is an affirmative defense. The Tyler court notes that:
[S]trictly speaking, it is not a defense to a burglary charge that entry into a habitation was consensual. Rather, the State must prove that entry was without the consent of the owner.
Also of note: The Tyler court observes that Blanton’s failure to bring forward the whole record is a strategic choice of the sort that the State made in Must Have Been a Boring Video.
