Eugene Cole v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law of Hunt County (Majority)

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 06-12-00057-CR

Case Date: 11/16/2012

Plaintiff: Eugene Cole

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law of Hunt County (Majority)

Preview:In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana _________________________
No. 06-12-00057-CR ______________________________

EUGENE COLE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Hunt County, Texas Trial Court No. CR1101283

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter

MEMORANDUM OPINION Eugene Cole appeals his conviction for evading detention. After attempting to sell drugs to a woman in the parking lot of a Greenville grocery store, Cole walked away headed north on Wesley Street. The woman called the police and described Cole as a heavy set white male with blonde, buzz-cut hair, wearing a white "wife beater" shirt and red pants. Officer Jason Kilgore, a police officer with the Greenville Police Department, noticed Cole, who matched the description of the suspect, walking north on Wesley Street. Kilgore pulled into a parking lot in front of Cole and, when Cole was approximately ten feet from his car, said to Cole, "I needed to speak with you just for a minute." Cole looked at Kilgore, turned, and "jogged across Wesley Street away from [Kilgore]." Kilgore activated his overhead lights and pursued Cole. Kilgore located Cole a few minutes later "ducked down behind a truck" in the parking lot of a nearby Pizza Hut. Cole again fled and Kilgore pursued on foot eventually apprehending Cole with the aid of another officer. A jury found Cole guilty of evading detention. Cole elected to have the trial court

assess punishment, and the trial court sentenced Cole to 365 days' confinement. Cole's issue on appeal is that the evidence is legally insufficient. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Cole argues a reasonable person would not have interpreted Kilgore's statements as a command and, therefore, the interaction was an encounter rather than a detention. Because a

person may decline to interact with a police officer during an encounter, Cole argues the evidence is legally insufficient. In evaluating legal sufficiency, we review all the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's judgment to determine whether any rational jury could have found the essential 2

elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893, 912 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979)); Hartsfield v. State, 305 S.W.3d 859, 863 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2010, pet. ref'd). Our rigorous legal sufficiency review focuses on the quality of the evidence presented. Brooks, 323 S.W.3d at 917

Download 06-12-00057-cr.pdf