Sharron Kaye Landry v. The State of TexasAppeal from County Court at Law No. 13 of Bexar County (Memorandum Opinion By Chief Justice Stone)

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 04-12-00470-CR

Case Date: 06/12/2013

Plaintiff: Sharron Kaye Landry

Defendant: The State of TexasAppeal from County Court at Law No. 13 of Bexar County (Memorandum Opinion By Chi

Preview:Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-12-00470-CR Sharron Kaye LANDRY, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the County Court at Law No. 13, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 369917 The Honorable Monica A. Gonzalez, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 12, 2013 AFFIRMED Sharron Kaye Landry was convicted by a jury of assault causing bodily injury. On appeal, Landry challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's finding of bodily injury and asserts the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on self-defense. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

04-12-00470-CR

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE In appeals in criminal cases, the only standard a reviewing court applies in reviewing sufficiency challenges is the Jackson v. Virginia 1 legal sufficiency standard. Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). Under that standard, we view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Adames v. State, 353 S.W.3d 854, 860 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011). As a reviewing court, we defer to the jury's

credibility and weight determinations because the jury is the sole judge of the witnesses' credibility and the weight to be given their testimony. Id. Landry challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's finding that she caused her husband bodily injury because her husband testified that he was never in pain. The evidence at trial is undisputed that Landry hit her husband in the head with the top of a bedpost. The investigating officer testified that he observed a gash on her husband's head and a rag with blood. Landry's husband testified that Landry did not hurt him when she hit him. Instead, she only aggravated him. Landry's husband testified that he did not feel any pain but only felt a knot. When Landry's husband later sought medical attention, a staple was used to close the wound; however, Landry's husband testified that he was never in any pain. "Bodily injury is broadly defined in the Penal Code as `physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.'" Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512, 524 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (quoting TEX. PENAL CODE ANN.

Download 04-12-00470-cr.pdf