Before Justices Morris, Moseley, and Myers
Opinion By Justice Morris
A jury convicted Roy Scott North of assault on a family member. He now complains the trial court erred by admitting into evidence testimony that appellant has anger problems and had been violent in the past. Concluding appellant’s issue is without merit, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. The background of the case and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties, and therefore we limit recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.4 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled.
Appellant’s twenty-one-year-old daughter, Jayme North, testified that while she was living with appellant and her stepmother, appellant took her car keys and cell phone from her because she refused to clean her room. When she attempted to grab them from her father – who was much bigger and taller than Jayme – he threw her to the ground two times, grabbed and squeezed the back of her neck with his hand, and at one point blocked her airway with his hand for so long that she lost consciousness. The State introduced photographs into evidence showing the injuries she sustained.
Appellant and his wife, however, testified for the defense that Jayme had actually attacked appellant in a rage after he took away her keys and phone. According to their version of events, appellant acted only out of self-defense and to calm his daughter but never caused the physical harm she alleged. They testified that Jayme must have inflicted the photographed injuries on herself or had a friend inflict them before she went to the hospital.
In his sole issue on appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred by admitting into evidence “extraneous conduct and character evidence that was inadmissible under the Texas Rules and was more prejudicial than probative.” Appellant complains of testimony by Jayme that appellant had a temper and had lied to her about her mother. He also points to testimony by Jeanne Prestjohn, his ex- wife and Jayme’s mother, claiming he had a problem with anger, had placed her in fear, and “had his hands” on her in the past. He further complains of testimony by his other daughters that he placed them in fear, was scary, hostile, often lost control, and had anger problems.
Regardless of whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting this evidence, the record also contains the following evidence that was admitted without any defense objection: the complainant testifying that she is afraid of appellant and that he has a temper, that he has always had a temper, and that it has gotten worse over time; the complainant testifying that appellant told her untrue things about her mother when she was about twelve years old; Prestjohn testifying that appellant complained to her about how the incident was entirely the complainant’s fault and how he could show her “what domestic violence was;” Prestjohn testifying that she was afraid of his anger for years and was still afraid of it, that appellant had placed her in fear for her safety and the safety of her daughters, and that she begged him to go to counseling when they were married because of his anger; testimony by Julia North, one of appellant’s other grown daughters, that it was tough growing up with appellant as a father, that he has issues managing his anger, that he had placed her in fear at times when he lost control of his anger, that he lost control “enough times that I have lots of memories,” and that although appellant would not admit he has an anger problem, she thinks he needs help for it; additional testimony from Julia that “[l]osing it is when you take a 250 some odd pound man and put him on a person’s neck” and that to the extent the complainant has anger problems, she thinks “that the children of parents [who] have anger problems, have anger problems”; testimony by appellant’s other grown daughter, Jill North, that when she lived with her father until her parents divorced, the environment was “very hostile,” that appellant has an anger problem, that she was terrified of him, that he sometimes loses control when he gets angry, that she and her sisters and her mother had all experienced it, and that he needs help; testimony by Jill on cross-examination that when she lived with him for a month after the divorce, he shoved her out of the door of his house and kicked her repeatedly and that he should have been in court a long time ago but they were all so afraid they never called the police.
Improperly admitted evidence is rendered harmless if the same or similar evidence is admitted without objection at another point in the trial. Smith v. State, 238 S.W.3d 512, 516 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.). Accordingly, we cannot conclude appellant was harmed here. We resolve his sole issue against him.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
JOSEPH B. MORRIS
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
ROY SCOTT NORTH, Appellant
THE STATE OF TEXAS, AppelleeAppeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 of Collin County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 003- 81727-10).
Opinion delivered by Justice Morris, Justices Moseley and Myers participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered August 7, 2012.
/Joseph B. Morris/
JOSEPH B. MORRIS