Se*ually Assaulted A Child And Thought He'd Walk Away — Judge Didn't Show Mercy

Added: 2026-05-06

[00:00:00]Okay, the court is calling 2021 CR 10254 State of Texas versus Jesse Esparza. Now parties announce for the record for the state.

[00:00:10]State is ready.

[00:00:11]And who's for the state? Sorry. I'm Michelle Hayden and Michael Villarreal.

[00:00:15]And for the defense?

[00:00:16]>> George Schaefer here for defendant, Your Honor, and we're ready. And are both parties ready?

[00:00:21]>> [snorts] >> Yes, Your Honor.

[00:00:22]>> All right. So, the court has the indictment and the indictment is for an attempted sexual assault. Uh are you proceeding on the indictment as the defendant, State? Yes, Your Honor. All right.

[00:00:33]And Mr. uh Esparza, it's the court's understanding that if you were to be convicted, you would be going to the jury for punishment. Yes, ma'am. All right.

[00:00:41]>> Yes, Your Honor.

[00:00:42]All right, how much time are each side asking for for um voir dire?

[00:00:47]Um between 30 to 45 minutes. All right.

[00:00:51]Okay, I'll give each side uh between 30 and 45 minutes.

[00:00:57]All right, if there's nothing else, we're going to bring the jury [snorts] in. Judge, there is one other thing.

[00:01:02]Yes.

[00:01:02]>> At this point, the defense is willing to stipulate the two priors so that we don't necessarily talk to the jury about those.

[00:01:11]I'm fine with that, Judge.

[00:01:14]Not having to get into the I mean, I just plan on going over the range of punishment and then if there was one prior prison trip, how that affected the range of punishment and then if there were two, I wasn't planning on getting into anything specific, but >> Well, if the defense is going to stipulate to the uh habitual offender enhancement allegations, then his range of punishment is 25 to life. There is no um Well, if he went to prison this time, this is what it is and that time.

[00:01:44]>> Yeah. Yes. So, I think uh what defense, and correct me if I'm wrong, I think the defense wants to stipulate to the habitual offender enhancement allegation so that the state will not question the jury and say, uh well, if we are able to prove that a person went to prison for one time, then the range of punishment is 15 to life.

[00:02:04]And if they we prove that they went to the second time, then the range of punishment is 25 to life. I think the defense um if they stipulate, they uh want the state, if you're going to talk to the jury about the range of punishment, just say the range of punishment is 25 to life. Am I correct in that assumption? Yes, Your Honor.

[00:02:27]That's fine. But you need to be completely truthful though so that there's something on the >> record. Yes. We're going to We will do that. Okay.

[00:02:33]I can I have one slide about that too that I can tweak. All right, thank you.

[00:02:38]All right, so uh we're still on the record with regards to the uh habitual offender enhancement allegation.

[00:02:44]Um Mr. Esparza, it states and it is further presented in and to said court that before the commission of the offense alleged above, here and after styled the primary offense, on the 19th day of May AD 2003 in cause number 1999 CR 0076 in Bear County, Texas, the defendant was convicted of the felony of possession [snorts] of a controlled substance, penalty group one, 4 g 200 g. How do you plead to that, true or not true?

[00:03:16]Um >> [snorts] >> true.

[00:03:18]And then it states before the commission of the primary offense and after the conviction and cause number 1999 CR 0076 was final, the defendant committed the felony of assault public servant bodily injury repeater and was convicted on the 6th day of December AD 2013 in cause number 2013 CR 6258 in Bear County, Texas. How do you plead [clears throat] to that, true or not true? They had waived the repeater on that one. I don't know.

[00:03:48]Yeah.

[00:03:50]I'm sorry. Uh yes, I was stupid. No, is it true or not true? Uh true, ma'am. All right, thank you. And so, then this will be the court's suggestion so that the work record is clean and the record is clean. Um State, if you have the exhibits for the proof of the habitual status, uh if this defense has no objection, you can label them and enter them into evidence.

[00:04:11]It's okay. Thank you, Your Honor. All right, so if you want to do that now Okay.

[00:04:15]>> before the jury comes in. All right.

[00:04:17]And of course, uh Mr. Schaefer, that won't be presented until and unless it becomes relevant.

[00:04:23]>> Right.

[00:04:34]Do you want us to offer these right before we select the jury? Uh yes, you need to offer them now.

[00:04:40]>> [snorts] >> State offers State's exhibit one and State's exhibit two into evidence. No objections, Your Honor.

[00:04:47]>> All right, State's exhibit number one and State's exhibit number two is admitted. We We assume that's the uh stipulation of the priors so that That is stipulated.

[00:04:56]The stipulation, just for the record, uh cause number um 1999 CR 0076, that's State's exhibit one.

[00:05:09]And also