Billy Gene Reynolds v. The State of TexasAppeal from 413th District Court of Johnson County (Memorandum Opinion )

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 10-12-00270-CR

Case Date: 06/20/2013

Plaintiff: Billy Gene Reynolds

Defendant: The State of TexasAppeal from 413th District Court of Johnson County (Memorandum Opinion )

Preview:
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-12-00270-CR
BILLY GENE REYNOLDS, Appellant
v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the 413th District Court Johnson County, Texas Trial Court No. F45940

MEMORANDUM  OPINION

Billy Gene Reynolds was indicted for the felony offense of driving while intoxicated. To elevate the offense to a felony, the indictment alleged two previous DWI convictions. The indictment also contained two punishment enhancement paragraphs. Reynolds pleaded not guilty to the offense of driving while intoxicated, but he pleaded true to the two DWI enhancement paragraphs. Reynolds also pleaded true to the two punishment felony enhancement paragraphs. The jury convicted
Reynolds of felony driving while intoxicated and assessed his punishment at life in
prison.  We affirm.
In his sole issue on appeal, Reynolds argues that the evidence is legally
insufficient to support his conviction.  The Court of Criminal Appeals has expressed our
standard of review of a sufficiency issue as follows:
In determining whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support a conviction, a reviewing court must consider all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and determine whether, based on that evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom, a rational fact finder could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.  Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979); Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9, 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). This "familiar standard gives full play to the responsibility of the trier of fact fairly 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. "Each fact need not point directly and independently to the guilt of the appellant, as long as the cumulative force of all the incriminating circumstances is sufficient to support the conviction." Hooper, 214 S.W.3d at 13.
Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878, 894 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011), cert den

Download 10-12-00270-cr.pdf