Tex.R. Rule 404(b) provides:(b)Other Crimes, Wrongs or Acts. Barajas's testimony that she telephoned and finally contacted Holik on November 15, 2001, and that Holik simply gave an explanation for the delay (without more) is not hearsay. As noted, on November 18, 2003, another search warrant was issued by a district judge to search the hard drive of appellant's computer for, inter alia, information, photos, and text from a Web site named necrobabes.com and information pertaining to death by asphyxiation. During the conversation Holik panicked when she realized that she did not have her expensive engagement ring on her hand. Forty-three-year old Diane Holik is selling her home to start a new life with her fianc in Houston, then she misses a meeting at work and police are sent to her home, where they find her bruised and lifeless body. Man gets life in prison for strangulation - Plainview Herald Id. Holik was engaged to be married and planned to move to Houston where her fianc lived. There was no objection to this latter statement which was Barajas's opinion, not a present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule. at 95-96 (citing Kearney v. Commonwealth, 4 Va.App. This is true, but the hypothetical scenario propounded by the State to Dr. Coons did not include any reference to robbery. Evidence which is not relevant is inadmissible.Tex.R. Appellant cites no authority to support his contentions. Rector was then requested by a prosecutor to conduct a more thorough search to look for Internet activity related to real estate. Appellant relies upon Brewer v. State, 126 S.W.3d 295 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2004, no pet. Appellant lied to the police when he denied being at Holik's house or in the Great Hills subdivision and asserted that he had gone to a radio station. Matson v. State, 819 S.W.2d 839, 846 (Tex.Crim.App.1991); Roberson v. State, 16 S.W.3d 156, 165 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. 1. There was evidence indicating that appellant had been to the Holik house twice on November 15, 2001, as he had been to other homes for sale in the Great Hills subdivision on November 15, 2001. Under all the circumstances, if error was properly preserved and presented, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling appellant's pretrial Rule 403 objections. Keeping in mind the particular facts of the instant case, we find no violation of the Fourth Amendment. Detective Roy Rector, a computer forensic examiner with the Austin Police Department, was initially requested to look for references in the computer to the victim, her address, or her realtor. His complaint about the testimony provided by Melody Blount, Annette Beeler, Connie Morton, Stephanie Nichols, Kathleen Hamlet, Sandy Menley, and Johna Ramirez is based on contact with appellant alleged to have occurred in May 2001. Proof of robbery committed as an afterthought and unrelated to the murder is not sufficient evidence of capital murder. Appellant cites Bachhofer v. State, 633 S.W.2d 869 (Tex.Crim.App.1982), for the proposition that extraneous offenses that are otherwise relevant are not too remote if they occurred within one year of the charged offense. Suddenly, appellant was close behind her in the room and still was not speaking. Appellant also said that he stopped at only one house to ask for directions, which he received from an older gray-haired man. Diane Holik was a resident of - The Arts of Entertainment - Facebook 12. Sign Up. Guevara, 152 S.W.3d at 49. A trial court abuses its discretion in the context of evidentiary rulings only if its ruling is outside the zone of reasonable disagreement. The man took a black-and-white flyer out of the plastic real estate bucket and approached the house. Russo claimed he could. 803. Diane lives at 400 1st Strt, Weatherly, PA 18255-1504 at present. at 984-85. According to Detective Rector's testimony, the unallocated clusters at some point were resident in the computer but had been deleted. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364, 90 S.Ct. On Thursday, November 15, 2001, after some difficulty in reaching Holik that morning for their weekly conference, Barajas talked to Holik in her home on the phone about 12:45 p.m. Austin time. 103(a)(1). 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Sanders v. State, 119 S.W.3d 818, 820 (Tex.Crim.App.2003); Cardenas v. State, 30 S.W.3d 384, 389-90 (Tex.Crim.App.2000). pet.). There were no statutory pretrial motions involved. Holik had plans to meet on the weekend with a man who was leaving her house when she talked to Barajas on the telephone. Deem stated that he could not determine whether a particular JPG file was within the scope of the search warrant until he opened it to see if it contained relevant information. As the evidence is legally sufficient to support the theory of murder committed in the course of robbery, we need not address the second point of error. The court stated: [The computer analyst] testified that when he searches a computer, he systematically goes through and opens user-created files regardless of their names. S2 E4: Diane Holik, a vibrant 43-year old, is about to move from Austin to Houston to start a new life with her fianc. Here we are presented with the separate testimony of thirteen witnesses whose different phrases or words are lifted out of the context of their individual testimony and claimed to be inadmissible under Rule 403. Evid. When she learned that the sale price was $270,000, she stated that the price was way out of their range.. Texas, 2001: Diane Holik is strangled in her home. Cain v. State, 958 S.W.2d 404, 407 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). See Diane Holik Vanmil's age, phone number, house address, email address, social media accounts, public records, and check for criminal records on Spokeo. Diane Holik Murder: Where is Patrick Anthony Russo Now? Id. 404(b).20 The trial court gave limiting instructions to the jury that are not the basis of the complaints here. In Brown, a maintenance worker at an apartment building was convicted of murdering a tenant's live-in girlfriend, Shelby Weinstein. This makes sense, as the user is free to name a file anything. Questions Post Question There are no questions yet for this company. Appellant told her that he would pay cash, that he had just sold a ranch, and that he needed to buy quickly. No such references were found. Rector examined the computer with a program called Encase, which is designed to recover any data located on a hard drive, whether it is an active computer file or a previously deleted file. Appellant received approximately $50.00 a week for his work at the church. Rule 403 provides:Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.Tex.R. Ties That Bind. The essence of appellant's complaint is that the police exceeded the scope of the search under the June 18 warrant when the police used information that they learned from the computer's Internet history to discover private information on appellant's computer. On appeal, appellant simply states: [A]ppellant's objections and argument are located at R. Vol.