ACCEPTED
12-15-00017-CR
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS
TYLER, TEXAS
12/4/2015 4:00:03 PM
Pam Estes
CLERK
ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED
CAUSE NO. NO. 12-15-00017-CR FILED IN
12th COURT OF APPEALS
TYLER, TEXAS
IN THE 12/4/2015 4:00:03 PM
COURT OF APPEALS PAM ESTES
TWELFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS Clerk
TYLER, TEXAS
__________________________________________________________________
ARTHUR JAMES WILLIAMS,
Appellant
VS.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
__________________________________________________________________
Appeal in Cause No. 31592
On Appeal from the Third Judicial District Court
of Anderson County, Texas
__________________________________________________________________
BRIEF FOR STATE
__________________________________________________________________
Eric S.A. Houghton
Asst. Criminal District Attorney
Anderson County, Texas
Anderson County Courthouse
Palestine, Texas 75801
Texas Bar No. #24012855
903/723-7400
i
IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL
JUDGE PRESIDING:
THE HONORABLE PAMELA FOSTER FLETCHER
DEFENDANT/APPELLANT:
ARTHUR JAMES WILLIAMS
FOR THE DEFENDANT:
APPELLATE ATTORNEY
COLIN MCFALL
513 N CHURCH ST
PALESTINE, TX 75801
TRIAL COUNSEL
COLIN MCFALL
513 N CHURCH ST
PALESTINE, TX 75801
FOR THE STATE:
TRIAL COUNSELS
STANLEY SOKOLOSKI
ON APPEAL
ERIC S.A. HOUGHTON
ASSISTANT CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY
ANDERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE
500 N. CHURCH STREET, RM. 38
PALESTINE, TX 75801
(903) 723-7400
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Identity of Parties and Counsel . . . . . . . ii
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . iii
Index of Authorities . . . . . . . . iv
Statement of the Case . . . . . . . . 1
Issues Presented . . . . . . . . . 1
Statement of Facts . . . . . . . . . 1
Summary of Argument . . . . . . . . 2
Argument . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
Prayer . . . . . . . . . . 6
Certificate of Service . . . . . . . . 7
Certificate of Word Count . . . . . . . 7
iii
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Cases Page
Acosta v. State, 429 S.W.3d 621 (Tex.Crim.App.2014) . . . 2
Brown v. State, 270 S.W.3d 564 (Tex.Crim.App.2009) . . . 2
Chambers v. State, 805 S.W.2d 459 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) . . 3
Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) . . . 2,3
Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) . . . 3
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) . . . 3
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) . . . . . 2,3
Statutes
Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. Art. 38.04 (Vernon Supp. 2009) . . 3
Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02 (Vernon Supp. 2009) . . . 4
iv
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Statement of the case is as stated in appellant’s brief page 7, with
the correction that the defendant was found guilty of the offense of Burglary
of a Habitation (V3, P140-141), not Forgery as inadvertently stated in
Appellant’s statement of facts. The Reporter’s Record will be referred to as
“V1, V2, etc.” unless otherwise noted. The Clerk’s Record will be referred
to as “CR1” or “CR2.” Appellant’s Brief will be referred to as “AB” unless
otherwise noted. Appellee is referred to as “State”.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Appellant contends the evidence is legally insufficient to support a
conviction for burglary of a habitation.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Are as stated in Appellant’s brief.
-1-
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Appellant contends the evidence is legally insufficient to support
conviction a conviction for burglary of a habitation.
ARGUMENT
The evidence presented at trial is legally sufficient to support a
conviction for burglary of a habitation.
In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction,
appellate courts view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the
prosecution in order to determine whether any rational trier of fact could
have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, (1979); Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d
772, 778 (Tex.Crim.App.2007); Acosta 429 S.W.3d at 624-5. This standard
gives full play to the responsibility of the trier of fact to resolve conflicts in
the testimony, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences
from basic facts to ultimate facts. Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319; Clayton, 235
S.W.3d at 778. The trier of fact is the sole judge of the weight and credibility
of the evidence. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.04 (Vernon 2013);
Brown v. State, 270 S.W.3d 564, 568 (Tex.Crim.App.2008), cert. denied,
556 U.S. 1211 (2009), vacated on other grounds by Ex parte Brown, 2014
-2-
Tex. Crim. App. Unpub. LEXIS 984 (2014). Thus, reviewing courts may not
re-evaluate the weight and credibility of the evidence and substitute their
judgment for that of the fact finder. Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735, 740
(Tex.Crim.App.1999), cert. denied, 529 U.S. 1131 (2000). Instead, appellate
courts “determine whether the necessary inferences are reasonable based
upon the combined and cumulative force of all the evidence when viewed in
the light most favorable to the verdict.” Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9, 16-
17 (Tex.Crim.App.2007). Reviewing courts must presume that the fact
finder resolved any conflicting inferences in favor of the prosecution and
defer to that resolution. Jackson, 443 U.S. at 326; Clayton, 235 S.W.3d at
778.
It is well established that the fact finder is entitled to judge the
credibility of witnesses and can choose to believe all, some, or none of the
testimony presented by the parties. Chambers v. State, 805 S.W.2d 459, 461
(Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Appellant raises on appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support
his conviction for one count of burglary of a habitation.
A person commits the offense of Burglary of a Habitation if, without
the effective consent of the owner, the person enters a habitation or a
-3-
building (or any portion of a building) not then open to the public, with
intent to commit theft or enters a building or habitation and commits or
attempts to commit theft. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02 (Vernon Supp.
2009)
Appellant argues “the only evidence presented at trial that arguably
addressed Appellant’s intent to commit theft, as he entered the habitation of
Phillip Morris, on the 28th night of June 2013, is conflicting testimony
regarding the scratches or ‘pry marks.’” (AB P15-16)
During trial, Detective Heavner testified that at 10 pm on the night of
the offense he responded to an alarm at the complainant’s residence,
approached the garage door, and saw Appellant inside the garage with tools
in his hands. (V3, P41-43) Detective Heavner further testified that when he
pushed the garage door open, Appellant pushed back, at which time
Detective Heavner kicked the door causing the Appellant and tools to fall to
the ground. (V3, P41-43)
Furthermore, Ms. Morris, the homeowner, testified that the morning
after the offense she and her husband found her garden cart had been moved
to the other side of their hedge, and the usual items she had left in the cart
“were piled out and …. there were tools in there that belonged to Phillip [her
-4-
husband].” She further testified that these tools were electrical and
woodworking tools that had been taken from of the garage and placed in the
cart. (V3, P24-25) Ms. Morris also stated their house and garage had an
alarm system which had been activated that evening, and the garage door
was locked. (V3, P26-27) Finally, Ms. Morris testified no one had
permission to enter her garage and take her husband’s tools. (V3 P32-33)
The jury, as finder of fact, could choose to believe her testimony in its
entirety. Her testimony alone provides ample evidence to support a
conviction for burglary of a habitation. Furthermore, the Appellant was
discovered by Detective Heavner inside the complaint’s garage with the
complainant’s tools in his arms at ten o’clock at night. The complainant had
set the alarm system earlier that evening and locked the garage door.
Finally, additional tools were discovered by the complainant the next
morning which had been taken from the garage and placed in a garden cart
in order to assist the Appellant in the commission of the offense. The
Appellant’s actions go well beyond “mere preparation,” and as such, there is
legally sufficient evidence to support Appellant’s conviction for burglary of
a habitation and his appeal should be denied.
-5-
PRAYER
WHEREFORE the Appellee prays that the Court upon consideration
hereof affirm the decision of the Trial Court.
Respectfully submitted by,
____________________
ERIC S.A. HOUGHTON
Asst. Criminal District Attorney
Anderson County, Texas
Anderson County Courthouse
500 N. Church Street, RM 38
Palestine, Texas 75801
Texas Bar No. #24012855
(903)723-7400
-6-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Brief for the State
has been delivered via email to: COLIN MCFALL on this the 4th day of
December, 2015, in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Rules of
Criminal and Appellate Procedure.
___________________________________
ERIC S.A. HOUGHTON
ASST. CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY
CERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNT
I also certify that the entire word count of the State’s reply brief is 1,470
words.
___________________________________
ERIC S.A. HOUGHTON
ASST. CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY
-7-