Appeal challenges first fentanyl murder conviction in Texas

WICHITA COUNTY ( KFDX/KJTL ) — The ground-breaking murder conviction of a Wichita Falls man for selling a fatal dose of fentanyl is being challenged in the Second Court of Appeals.

Jasinto Jimenez, 23 , was convicted of murder and sentenced to 45 years in prison in Wichita County ‘s 30th District Court for selling two pills containing fentanyl , one of which was later ingested by Andres Diaz, leading to his death.

The trial and conviction of Jimenez was the first of its kind in Texas following the passage of House Bill 6 , a law that expanded the definition of conduct constituting murder to include those who knowingly make and distribute the deadly drug fentanyl .

Now, Jimenez is appealing the precedent-setting conviction and requesting either a reversal of the judgment and sentence or a new trial altogether.

The appeal brief was filed with the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth on July 27, 2024, with local attorney Dustin Nimz representing Jimenez during the appeal process.

According to the appeal brief, Jimenez isn’t arguing that he’s innocent of dealing the drug.

“It was uncontroverted at trial that Jimenez sold two pills containing fentanyl to Leigha Smith,” the appeal said. “That Smith later gave one of the pills to Andres Diaz, and that Diaz ingested the pill and died of an overdose of fentanyl.”

Smith, who testified on behalf of the prosecution during Jimenez’s trial , was initially a co-defendant also charged with murder. However, that charge was later reduced to manslaughter . Smith pled guilty following the trial of Jimenez and was placed on probation.

The brief instead argued that evidence introduced during the trial wasn’t sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that delivering fentanyl is objectively dangerous to human life, nor was it enough to prove that Jimenez caused the death of Diaz.

The appeal brief said that according to Texas law, a person commits murder if he commits or attempts to commit a felony, and in the course of doing so, he commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.

The appeal said that while the prosecution proved Jimenez committed a felony by selling the fentanyl-laced pills and that Diaz died, they failed to prove that dealing the drug was clearly dangerous to human life, or that Jimenez’s actions caused the death of Diaz.

According to the appeal, there was no evidence of a link between Jimenez selling the pills to Smith and that act causing Diaz’s death, and there was no evidence that Jimenez could have foreseen the actions of Smith and Diaz after selling them the pills.

“Jasinto’s involvement in the case on the morning of July 15, 2022, was limited [to] the sale of two pills and a small amount of marijuana to Smith, a person known to him as a ‘perc’ user,” the appeal brief said.

The brief argued that testimony during the trial focused on whether or not fentanyl is dangerous but not on Jimenez’s actions.

“The evidence of [the] general dangerousness of fentanyl, however scant or strong, does not support a finding that the act of delivery was clearly dangerous to human life,” the appeal brief said.

The appeal then added that Smith consumed one of the two fentanyl pills without any harm and even sought to purchase more. It said that Jimenez never agreed for Smith to distribute the fentanyl further, but that she did so on her own, breaking the “chain of causation.”

According to the brief, there was also a lack of evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Jimenez caused the death of Diaz and that numerous unforeseeable events alleviated Jimenez’s criminal causation.

The appeal said that Jimenez sold the two fentanyl pills to Smith, but not to Diaz. It said he never distributed any drugs to Diaz, that Diaz wasn’t mentioned in Smith’s conversation with Jimenez, and that Jimenez wasn’t even aware that Diaz was in the vehicle with Smith when she bought the pills.

The appellate brief also said that Jimenez had no way of knowing that one of the pills would be given to Diaz, nor could he have known that Diaz would crush and snort the pill, nor could he have known that Smith would have driven around Wichita Falls with Diaz in an apparent overdose and leave him alone in a car while she went to watch a movie.

Now that a brief has been filed on behalf of Jimenez, the prosecution will be given a chance to submit a brief of its own in response. Pending any delays or extensions, the state’s reply brief is due on August 29, 2024.

After the prosecution’s response is filed, Jimenez will have an opportunity to file a reply before the case is submitted to the justices of the Second Court of Appeals, who can either affirm the verdict and sentence, reverse the conviction, or remand the case for a brand new trial.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KETK.com | FOX51.com.