1 

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ 

NO. 09-23-00215-CR

__________________ 

DESHAUN MANUEL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. F21-37551 

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A grand jury indicted Appellant Deshaun Manuel (“Appellant,” “Manuel,” or 

“Deshaun”) for murder, for intentionally and knowingly causing the death of Jacoby 

Jackson by shooting him with a deadly weapon, namely a firearm. Appellant pleaded 

not guilty, but a jury found him guilty as charged and assessed punishment at thirty 

years’ imprisonment. On appeal, Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the 

evidence to support the jury’s rejection of Appellant’s contention that he acted in 

self-defense. We affirm.
2 

Evidence at Trial

Testimony of Law Enforcement and Affiliated Personnel 

Sergeant Shawn Tolley of the Beaumont Police Department testified that he 

supervises 911 operations and is the custodian of records for the 911 center. He 

identified State’s Exhibit 1 as recordings of calls to 911 on November 22, 2020, from 

a house in the 1600 block of Glasshouse Street in Beaumont, and the exhibit was 

admitted and published to the jury. The exhibit included recordings of numerous 

calls to 911 with reports of shots being fired in the street. 

Officer Chancellor Vanhouten, a patrol officer with the Beaumont Police 

Department, testified that on the night of November 22, 2020, he was dispatched to 

a residence on Glasshouse Street in response to a call about a shooting. Vanhouten 

recalled that when he arrived, he saw a man lying in the street with his head bleeding, 

and the man was later identified as Jacoby Jackson (“Jacoby”), and it appeared 

Jacoby had gunshot wounds. Vanhouten testified that a lot of people were on the 

street, when he asked if any of them saw what happened, they told him they did not 

see anything. According to Vanhouten, the residence near the shooting is “a very 

well-known [] home that’s used for parties all throughout the week[]” and “usually 

50 to 100[]” people attend. Vanhouten identified State’s Exhibit 2 as footage from 

his body camera that night, and the exhibit was admitted and published to the jury. 

Vanhouten testified that on the body cam video, he talks about shell casings, and 
3

“bullets that were shot and fired[]” from a semi-automatic gun. Vanhouten testified 

that he recalled also seeing 9 mm casings at the scene.

Dr. Selly Strauch-Rivers testified that she is the chief forensic pathologist at 

Forensic Medical Management Services of Texas where she performs autopsies for 

several counties, and she performed an autopsy on Jacoby Jackson on November 30, 

2020. Rivers testified that Jacoby had two gunshot wounds—one on the left side of 

his head, and another on his back—neither of which showed stippling. According to 

Rivers, when there is no stippling on a bullet wound, it generally is the result of a 

shot more than two feet away. She testified that the x-ray images she took showed 

two projectiles in Jacoby’s body. According to the doctor, the wound to the back 

was not fatal, but the head wound “would be an immediately fatal wound,” and the 

bullet ricocheted inside the skull. Rivers further testified that, based on the nature of 

the wounds, the two shots would have occurred “in very rapid succession[,]” but she 

could not tell which wound occurred first or whether the bullets were fired from the 

same gun. According to Rivers, the cause of Jacoby’s death was a “gunshot wound 

to the head perforating the skull and brain[.]” Rivers removed the projectiles from 

the body and gave the projectiles to law enforcement. Rivers explained that a 

toxicology analysis performed by another lab showed “noncontributory substances” 

including caffeine and nicotine as well as delta-9 THC, methamphetamine, and 
4

ethanol, in Jacoby’s blood but she could not tell whether any of these substances 

would cause an individual to be more or less aggressive.

Michelle Ceja, a crime scene investigator for the Beaumont Police 

Department, testified that she was called to a scene on Glasshouse on November 22, 

2020, where she took videos, and another technician took photographs. She agreed 

that the evidence gathered at the scene included shell casings and Jacoby’s cell 

phone, and that some of the casings were silver but another was copper in color. Ceja 

recalled being told that the Glasshouse residence was the location for an after-hours 

house party.

Steve Mayes, a forensic scientist with the Jefferson County Regional Crime 

Lab, identified State’s Exhibits 56 through 61 as photographs of a car the lab was 

asked to examine. Mayes testified that the lab recovered a gun from under the 

driver’s seat, an empty plastic pistol case in the trunk, a magazine from a gun, and a 

backpack with a T-shirt inside that had blood on it. He also recalled a possible bullet 

defect in the rear passenger side taillight, and when they removed the taillight, they 

found a bullet.

Robert Baldwin testified that he is a private consultant on firearms and tool 

marks identification, and he worked with the Jefferson County Regional Crime Lab 

in 2020. He agreed that he did an examination in this case of several projectiles and 

casings gathered as evidence in this case, including twenty-nine fired cartridge 
5

casings, but he did not receive any firearms for examination. Based on the number 

of casings submitted, Baldwin concluded there were at least nine semi-automatic 

firearms involved in the shooting.

Detective Heather Wilson with the Beaumont Police Department testified that 

on November 22, 2020, she was called to respond to a shooting at a residence on 

Glasshouse Street. When she arrived, a deceased person was lying in the road, and 

he was identified as Jacoby Jackson. She recalled that she observed numerous shell 

casings in the road. According to Wilson, although about twenty people were in the 

area, none of the people said they knew or saw what had happened. Wilson testified 

that when she arrived there was no weapon around Jacoby’s body. Wilson also 

testified that Joseph Matthews turned himself in about a month after the shooting 

after he was found in Houston, and Deshaun turned himself in a couple of days after 

the shooting. Wilson testified that it is not unusual for shots to be fired on Glasshouse 

Street nor to find shell casings in the street. According to Wilson, a white Buick 

registered to “Lacey B.” 1 was found a few days after the shooting.

Wilson agreed that she conducted an interview of Lacey on December 28, 

2020, during which Lacey said that Deshaun stayed at her home and that she had 

seen a gun in his room. Wilson further testified that she conducted an interview of 

another person by the name of “Deanne” on November 25, 2020, during which 

1 We use pseudonyms to refer to witnesses not affiliated with law enforcement.
6 

Deanne said that she had witnessed Deshaun approach Jacoby just before the 

shooting and she heard Deshaun tell Jacoby to go outside. According to Wilson, 

Deanne also told her that she saw Joseph Matthews and Deshaun shooting in the 

direction of Jacoby, and that Deanne saw Jacoby on the ground. Deanne also told 

Wilson that she saw Deshaun and Joseph get into a white Buick, and they were 

shooting as they drove off.

Detective Wilson identified State’s Exhibit 62 as a recording of a video 

interview of Joseph Matthews that she conducted, and the exhibit was admitted into 

evidence and published to the jury. During the interview, Joseph said that Deshaun 

shot Jacoby once in the head, Jacoby fell to the ground, and then Deshaun shot him 

again. Joseph also states that some people were shooting at Deshaun. Joseph denied 

having anything to do with shooting Jacoby.

Testimony of Family and Friends

“Lina” testified that she knew the defendant because she had gone to high 

school with him. Lina testified that at the time of the shooting she had dated Jacoby 

for about six or seven months. She recalled that about a week before the shooting, 

she and Jacoby went to the residence on Glasshouse “to a house party that everybody 

goes to after the club.” Lina testified that Deshaun was there, and he tried to start a 

conversation with her, but she told him she had a boyfriend who was watching her. 

According to Lina, when she came back from her car, someone was holding Jacoby 
7

back trying to “de-escalate the problem[,]” Deshaun exchanged words with Jacoby, 

and she heard Deshaun say, “I’m not going to fight over a [woman].” Lina also 

testified that she, Jacoby, and Deshaun were at the Glasshouse residence the 

following Friday, too.

Lina testified that Jacoby went to the Glasshouse residence with a friend on 

November 22, 2020, at approximately 2 a.m., and she arrived with another friend at 

2:45 a.m. According to Lina, as soon as she parked, she heard a gunshot, then there 

were three or four more shots, she heard some people say, “we got to go[,]” and she 

saw an SUV speed off. As Lina approached the house, she saw Jacoby’s jacket on 

the ground, Jacoby was not moving, she saw the gunshot to his head and a gunshot 

on his side, and she started screaming. Lina testified that she called 911, and she 

turned Jacoby over so that he was lying on his back. Lina did not know who said,

“we got to go.” She did not see anyone with guns, and she did not see a weapon on 

or next to Jacoby.

Lina was later recalled to testify for the State, and she described Deshaun as 

“a genuine, fine, loving person[]” and a “jokester[.]” Lina knew that Deshaun carried 

a gun, and he would “make it known” that he had a gun by carrying it on his hip, but 

she also said he was more likely to fight than carry a gun. She agreed that partygoers 

at the Glasshouse residence would sometimes go outside and fire shots into the air. 

According to Lina, she heard the first gunshot when parking her car, and then as she 
8

started walking, she heard three or four more shots. She testified again that she did 

not see a gun on or near Jacoby’s body. 

“Deanne” agreed that she did not want to testify, and she testified she had to 

be “arrest[ed]” to appear in court. She identified the defendant as Deshaun and stated 

that she knew of him although she did not “personally” know him, and she also 

agreed she knew Joseph Matthews.2 According to Deanne, Deshaun and Joseph 

carried weapons and people called them “the hot boys[]” because they were hotheaded. Deanne also testified that she knew Jacoby Jackson, she knew about the 

shooting at the Glasshouse residence on November 22, 2020, and she testified that 

the residence was “a party house[]” where people would hang out after going to a 

club. Deanne testified that she saw Jacoby there the night he was killed. She also 

recalled seeing Deshaun and Joseph Matthews at the residence that night.

According to Deanne, about thirty minutes before the shooting, she was inside 

the residence and she saw Deshaun walk up to Jacoby and tap him on the shoulder, 

after which Deshaun and Jacoby went outside, but it did not look like any hostility 

was involved. She agreed that she told a detective that Deshaun had said to Jacoby, 

“Let me holler at you[,]” indicating that he needed to talk and get something off his 

chest or give him a piece of his mind, and “that’s what Glasshouse [is] for, you go 

2 During his testimony later during the trial, Manuel referred to Joseph 

Matthews as his “co-defendant,” although our appellate record does not include 

details about a prosecution of Matthews.
9

get your fights out[.]” Deanne testified that she saw Deshaun and Jacoby walk 

outside, she heard gunshots, and about five or ten minutes later, Joseph walked 

outside, and there were more shots. Deanne further testified that she saw Deshaun 

and Joseph fire weapons. Deanne recalled seeing Jacoby fall, and then Deshaun and 

Joseph were “running to the car while they [were] shooting[,]” but she did not see 

Jacoby with a weapon, and Deshaun fired into the air as they drove off. Deanne 

testified that she ran to Jacoby to see if he was okay, and when another woman “froze 

up[]” while calling 911, Deanne took the phone and started talking with 911. Deanne 

also testified that she did not see anyone pick up a weapon from Jacoby nor did she 

see a weapon near Jacoby.

On cross-examination, Deanne testified that she did not see any confrontation 

between Deshaun and Jacoby before the shooting, and she did not see any guns that 

night other than during the shooting. She recalled seeing Deshaun and Joseph 

shooting towards Jacoby while they were running to their car, and she did not see 

anyone else shooting. On redirect, Deanne testified that she did not know Jacoby to 

be the sort of person to shoot someone, and although she did not know Deshaun and 

Joseph personally, she had seen them with guns before.

“Chance” testified that Deshaun is his stepson, that he raised Deshaun, and he 

was involved in his life. Chance was aware of the shooting on November 22, 2020, 

and when he learned that Deshaun had been hurt, he tried to get Deshaun to go to a 
10

hospital for medical attention. Chance recalled that Deshaun was at Janice’s3 house 

that night, and Chance and Chance’s girlfriend Lacey drove to the house. According 

to Chance, sometimes Deshaun would stay with him and sometimes with Deshaun’s 

children’s mother. Chance testified that Lacey had never told him she found a gun 

under Deshaun’s pillow, nor had she said she thought something bad was going to 

happen. Chance testified that Deshaun was shot in the upper part of his leg, but 

Deshaun did not go to the hospital because he was “discombobulated[]” and scared. 

Later, after Deshaun’s mother arrived, Deshaun went to the hospital. Chance further 

testified that a lot of people were at the apartment that night, and he did not recall 

whether Joseph Matthews was there.

“Lacey” agreed that she did not want to testify, and she had to be “arrest[ed]”

to appear in court. She identified the defendant as Deshaun Manuel, and she testified 

that, at the time of the shooting, she dated Deshaun’s stepfather, Chance, and they 

shared a home together. Lacey testified that, about a month before the shooting, she 

found a gun in Deshaun’s room, and she expressed concern to Chance. Lacey 

recalled that on the night of the shooting she and Chance were gaming at a store near 

their home. She recalled going to an apartment where Deshaun was with Chance 

sometime after the incident, and Chance told her Deshaun was shot. She testified 

3 “Janice” testified later in the trial that she and Deshaun have been in a 

relationship and Deshaun is the father of her children.
11

that she had owned a white Buick LeSabre that she sold to Deshaun, and she 

recognized the vehicle pictured in State’s Exhibits 56 through 61 as the Buick she 

sold to Deshaun. She agreed she talked with a detective after the incident and that 

the Buick was still in her name even though she had sold it to Deshaun. Lacey 

testified that Deshaun’s girlfriend Janice contacted her to ask if Lacey would keep 

the Buick at her house, but Lacey did not want it at her house after “it was involved 

in a murder[.]” Lacey testified that she did not tell the detective that Deshaun had 

put a gun in his backpack several times. She also testified that she did not tell the 

detective that Deshaun had a gun under his pillow.

“Janice” agreed that she did not want to testify, and that Deshaun is the father 

of her children. She testified that, at the time of the shooting, she and Deshaun were 

together on an “off and on[]” basis and sometimes stayed together. Janice recalled 

that, on the day of the shooting, Deshaun came by during the day with his cousin 

Joseph Matthews, and Deshaun was driving a white Buick that he had bought from 

Lacey, but he had not transferred the title to his name. Janice testified that Deshaun 

called her to say he had gone to a house party on Glasshouse with Joseph. Janice 

said she did not go to the party, and she stayed at her apartment all night. According 

to Janice, Deshaun came to her apartment early the next morning in the Buick, which 

Joseph was driving, and Deshaun “was in the passenger seat on the floor curled up.” 

She further testified that Deshaun had been shot in the inner thigh, there was a lot of 
12 

blood, and she helped bring Deshaun into her apartment. Janice recalled that 

Deshaun was panicking and crying, but he did not tell her what happened, and he 

did not want to go to the hospital. Janice recalled that Chance and Lacey showed up 

and Chance tried to convince Deshaun to go to the hospital. She testified that she 

had never seen Deshaun with a gun, but that Joseph had two guns on him when he 

came to her apartment that night, and she did not know what he did with them. She 

also testified that she heard Joseph say something about a “Draco” gun. When asked 

what Joseph said when his mother arrived at her apartment that night, Janice replied,

He said that they [were] on Glasshouse. They [were] partying, chilling. 

Jacoby approached Deshaun and asked him about his girlfriend. 

Deshaun told him he didn’t fight [over] females. They tried to walk 

away from the situation. When they turned around, they [saw] Jacoby 

tussling with one of his friends to get a gun. And by the time they made 

it to the car and turned back around, Jacoby fired a shot, and Deshaun 

was shot. 

According to Janice, Joseph said that Jacoby shot at them. Janice agreed that she told

an investigator that Joseph grabbed a gun from Jacoby and that Deshaun had a gun 

“that you can put in your pocket.” Janice testified that Deshaun never told her what 

happened on the night of the shooting and that Deshaun and Joseph did not tell her 

that Jacoby had died nor that they shot someone.

Testimony of Deshaun Manuel

Deshaun testified in his defense. He explained that there were after-hours 

house parties at the Glasshouse residence where “a hundred or more[]” people would 
13

attend. Deshaun testified that he had been at the residence on Glasshouse the Friday 

before the shooting, and he saw Jacoby there. He agreed he approached Lina to talk 

with her, and Jacoby had told him not to talk with her saying to him, “leave my girl 

alone. That’s my girl[,]” to which Deshaun responded, “my bad[.]” Deshaun testified 

that he did not have a gun with him, he told Jacoby he was not going to fight over a 

woman, and he did not have a grudge against Jacoby.

Deshaun recalled that he arrived at the Glasshouse residence at about 12:30 

a.m. on the night of the shooting, and he saw Jacoby at about 1 or 1:30 a.m. Deshaun 

testified that his cousin, Joseph Matthews, was also there, and before Joseph went to 

the bathroom, Joseph slipped Deshaun a gun, which Deshaun put in his pocket. At 

some point, Deshaun felt someone shove against his shoulder, and when Deshaun 

looked up, he saw it was Jacoby who had bumped into him. Deshaun testified that 

he asked Jacoby what his problem was, and Jacoby responded that he wanted to 

fight, but Deshaun said he did not want to fight him over a woman. According to 

Deshaun, at that point, Jacoby went outside, and Deshaun went to Joseph and told 

him that Jacoby was gathering people and talking about him. Deshaun testified that 

he did not want to start any trouble, and he just wanted to leave.

Deshaun recalled that, as he and Joseph were leaving the house, Jacoby asked 

him, “[are] you going to take your fate or what?” which Deshaun interpreted to mean 

that Jacoby was going to fight. Deshaun told Jacoby he was not going to fight, and 
14

Jacoby reached for a “Draco gun” from one of Jacoby’s friends. Deshaun thought 

Jacoby was going to shoot him, and Deshaun feared for his life. After Jacoby got the 

Draco gun and turned around, Deshaun pulled the gun from his pocket and shot, and 

then Deshaun ran to his car. Deshaun testified that Joseph grabbed the Draco gun 

from Jacoby and started shooting it. According to Deshaun, when he got to his car, 

he was shot in the thigh, and he was bleeding. Deshaun testified that Joseph shoved 

him into his car, and then Joseph jumped into the car and “peeled off.” Deshaun 

recalled that he went to the hospital about 8 or 9 a.m. that morning. Deshaun testified 

that he learned from his mother there was a warrant for his arrest, and he turned 

himself in on November 27. Deshaun testified that he did not have guns at Lacey’s 

house, and he did not have a gun in his backpack because he did not carry a 

backpack.

On direct examination by defense counsel, the following exchange occurred:

Q: Okay, When you shot, did you feel like you had to do that to defend 

yourself?

A: Yes, sir.

. . . .

Q: What do you think would have happened if you wouldn’t have shot 

Jacoby?

A: He’d have killed me.

On cross-examination, Deshaun agreed he had talked with Lina the Friday 

before the shooting, but he did not know that she was dating Jacoby, and on the night 
15

of the shooting, Deshaun got a gun from Joseph. Deshaun believed that when he first 

shot Jacoby, he shot him in the head, and then Jacoby fell. According to Deshaun, 

after Jacoby fell, Deshaun ran to his car, and he did not stand over Jacoby and shoot 

him in the back. Deshaun agreed that people fired at him and Joseph as they ran to 

his car after he had shot Jacoby. Deshaun testified that he and Joseph then went to 

Janice’s apartment, and he did not say anything about what had happened, and he 

did not know what Joseph did with the two guns he had. 

Deshaun also testified that when Joseph told the police in his interview that 

Deshaun stood over Jacoby and shot him a second time, that was a lie. He further 

testified that what Deanne testified about him and Joseph carrying weapons was not 

true. As to the people that Deshaun thought testified untruthfully, Deshaun said, “I 

believe if they were telling the truth and they knew they were telling the truth, and 

they were doing what was right, they wouldn’t have had been arrested to come here. 

They would have agreed to come in on their own.” Deshaun testified that Joseph lied 

to keep himself out of trouble, and Joseph was not supposed to have a gun because 

he was on probation. Deshaun also testified as follows on further cross-examination:

Q: Jacoby didn’t point a gun at you, did he?

A: He tried to.

Q: He didn’t ever point a gun at you, did he?

A: No, sir. 
16

The jury charge included an instruction on self-defense.4 The jury found 

Deshaun Manuel guilty of murder as charged in the indictment. After a hearing on 

punishment, the jury assessed punishment at thirty years of imprisonment. Manuel 

timely filed a notice of appeal.

Issue

In a single issue, Appellant argues that the evidence at trial was not sufficient 

for him to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because he acted in selfdefense. According to the Appellant, Jacoby Jackson had a problem with Appellant 

talking with Jacoby’s girlfriend at the house party on Glasshouse Street. Appellant 

contends that after tension between the two men developed, Jacoby grabbed a 

firearm and turned to shoot Appellant, and Appellant then fired his weapon in selfdefense because he feared for his life and safety.

Standard of Review and Applicable Law

In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence—including the evidence 

supporting a jury’s rejection of a self-defense claim—we review all the evidence in 

the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether any rational factfinder 

could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Braughton v. State, 569 S.W.3d 592, 

607-08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018); Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9, 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 

4 Manuel does not challenge the jury charge on appeal.
17

2007). We give deference to the factfinder’s responsibility to fairly resolve conflicts 

in the testimony, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from 

basic facts to ultimate facts. Hooper, 214 S.W.3d at 13. If the record contains 

conflicting inferences, we must presume that the factfinder resolved such facts in 

favor of the verdict and defer to that resolution. Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893, 

899 n.13 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (citing Jackson, 443 U.S. at 326); Clayton v. State, 

235 S.W.3d 772, 778 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); see also Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319 (the 

factfinder’s responsibility is “to resolve conflicts in the testimony, to weigh the 

evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts[]”); 

Murray v. State, 457 S.W.3d 446, 448-49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (citing Hooper, 

214 S.W.3d at 12). The jury as factfinder is the sole judge of the weight of the 

evidence and credibility of the witnesses, and it may believe all, some, or none of 

the testimony presented by the parties. See Febus v. State, 542 S.W.3d 568, 572 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2018); Margraves v. State, 34 S.W.3d 912, 919 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2000); Heiselbetz v. State, 906 S.W.2d 500, 504 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). The 

appellate court does not reweigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of the 

evidence, nor does it substitute its own judgment for that of the factfinder. Williams 

v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742, 750 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007).

“Direct and circumstantial evidence are treated equally: ‘Circumstantial 

evidence is as probative as direct evidence in establishing the guilt of an actor, and 
18

circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to establish guilt.’” Clayton, 235 

S.W.3d at 778 (quoting Hooper, 214 S.W.3d at 13). Each fact need not point directly 

and independently to the guilt of the defendant, as long as the cumulative force of 

all the incriminating circumstances is sufficient to support the conviction. Temple v. 

State, 390 S.W.3d 341, 359 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013); Hooper, 214 S.W.3d at 13; 

Johnson v. State, 871 S.W.2d 183, 186 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).

In a homicide case, the defendant’s state of mind is a question of fact for the 

jury to determine, and the jury may infer intent “from any facts in evidence which it 

determines proves the existence of such intent to kill, such as the use of a deadly 

weapon.” Brown v. State, 122 S.W.3d 794, 800 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (citing Hall 

v. State, 418 S.W.2d 810, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967)). “It is both a common-sense 

inference and an appellate presumption that a person intends the natural 

consequences of his acts, and that the act of pointing a loaded gun at someone and 

shooting it toward that person at close range demonstrates an intent to kill.” Ex parte 

Thompson, 179 S.W.3d 549, 556 n.18 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (internal citations 

omitted). Intent to murder can be inferred from circumstantial evidence, such as a 

defendant’s acts, words, and the extent of the victim’s injuries. See Ex parte 

Weinstein, 421 S.W.3d 656, 668-69 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Evidence of flight 

reflects on a defendant’s consciousness of guilt of the crime charged. See Yost v. 
19

State, 222 S.W.3d 865, 875 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. ref’d) 

(citing Bigby v. State, 892 S.W.2d 864, 884 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (en banc)).

A person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree that 

person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself 

against another person’s use or attempted use of unlawful force. See Tex. Penal Code 

Ann. § 9.31(a); Gamino v. State, 537 S.W.3d 507, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017). A 

person is justified in using deadly force if he would be justified in using force under 

section 9.31, and he reasonably believed that deadly force was immediately 

necessary to protect himself against another’s use or attempted use of deadly force. 

Gamino, 537 S.W.3d at 510; see also Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 9.32(a). The Penal 

Code defines the term “reasonable belief” to mean a “belief that would be held by 

an ordinary and prudent man in the same circumstances as the actor.” Tex. Penal 

Code Ann. § 1.07(42).

Whether the defendant acted in self-defense is a question for the jury to 

decide. Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910, 913 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Where a 

defendant claims self-defense, the defendant bears the burden of production, which 

requires the production of some evidence that supports the defense. See Zuliani v. 

State, 97 S.W.3d 589, 594 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (citing Tex. Penal Code Ann. 

§ 2.03; Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 914). Once the defendant produces such evidence, the 

State then bears the burden of persuasion to disprove the defense. Id. The State is 
20

not required to produce evidence that refutes the claim of self-defense, but it must 

prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. A jury is free to accept or reject the 

evidence of self-defense, and a jury verdict of guilty is an implicit finding against 

the defensive theory. See id.; Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 914.

Analysis

Appellant testified that he shot Jacoby Jackson, and he believed his shot hit 

Jacoby in the head. Appellant also testified that after he shot Jacoby, he and Joseph 

drove away from the scene. According to Appellant, he felt that he had to shoot at 

Jacoby to defend himself, and if he had not shot Jacoby, Jacoby would have killed 

him. However, Appellant also testified that Jacoby did not point a gun at him. 

Appellant testified that Joseph lied when he told police that Appellant stood over 

Jacoby and shot him a second time, and Joseph was lying to keep himself out of 

trouble because he was on probation and not supposed to have a gun. Appellant also 

testified that Deanne was not truthful when she testified that Appellant carried guns. 

Appellant testified that he and Joseph left the Glasshouse area after the shooting. 

The jury could have disbelieved Appellant and could have believed the testimony of 

Joseph and Deanne. See Febus, 542 S.W.3d at 572; Margraves, 34 S.W.3d at 919.

The fact that Appellant fled the scene is also circumstantial evidence from which a 

jury may infer consciousness of guilt. See Devoe v. State, 354 S.W.3d 457, 470 (Tex. 
21

Crim. App. 2011) (citing Alba v. State, 905 S.W.2d 581, 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1995)); Bigby, 892 S.W.2d at 884.

Detective Heather Wilson testified that, in her interview with Deanne, Deanne 

told her she saw Deshaun and Joseph shooting at Jacoby, she saw Jacoby on the 

ground, and Deshaun and Joseph were shooting as they drove away from the 

Glasshouse residence. In his interview with Detective Wilson, Joseph Matthews said 

that Appellant shot Jacoby, the first shot hit Jacoby in the head, and Appellant shot 

Jacoby again after Jacoby fell.

Lina testified that she heard gunshots as she arrived at the Glasshouse 

residence on the night of the shooting, and she saw a vehicle speed away. She also 

testified that she saw two gunshot wounds on Jacoby—one to his head, and another 

to his side. Lina testified that she did not see anyone with guns, and she did not see 

a weapon near Jacoby, although she knew Appellant carried a gun.

Deanne, Lacey, and Janice did not want to testify, and Deanne and Lacey 

agreed they testified because they were “arrested.” Deanne testified that she was at 

the Glasshouse residence the night of the shooting, she saw Appellant and Jacoby 

walk outside, after which she heard gunshots, and when Joseph walked outside about 

five or ten minutes later, she heard more shots. She also specifically testified that 

she saw Appellant and Joseph fire weapons and run to the car after Jacoby fell. And 

she did not see a weapon near Jacoby. She also testified that she saw Appellant fire 
22

a gun into the air as he and Joseph drove away from the scene. Lacey testified that 

she had seen a gun under Appellant’s pillow, and she expressed concern to Chance, 

who was her boyfriend and Appellant’s stepfather. She also testified that she did not 

tell law enforcement that Appellant had put a gun in his backpack several times, nor 

did she say Appellant had a gun under his pillow. Janice testified that she had never 

seen Appellant with a gun, but that Joseph had two guns on the night of the shooting.

In this case, the jury was presented with conflicting views about the shooting, 

and it had to decide the case based on which view it determined was more credible. 

See Braughton, 569 S.W.3d at 610. There is sufficient evidence in the record to 

rationally support the jury’s rejection of Appellant’s version of events. See id. at 611. 

The jury’s decision to reject Appellant’s claim of self-defense could have hinged on 

the credibility of the witnesses and the weight the jury decided to give to their 

testimony. See Smith v. State, 355 S.W.3d 138, 146 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

2011, pet. ref’d) (citing Chambers v. State, 805 S.W.2d 459, 461 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1991)). The testimony of a defendant does not conclusively prove a self-defense 

claim. Id. Here, the jury chose not to believe Appellant’s testimony. The State’s 

witnesses, the physical evidence (including that no one found Jacoby had a gun after 

he was shot), and Appellant’s flight from the scene undermine Appellant’s claim of 

self-defense. We conclude that, based on the evidence presented at the trial, the jury 

could have rationally rejected Appellant’s claim of self-defense and determined that 
23

deadly force was not immediately necessary at the time Appellant shot Jacoby. See

Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 9.31, 9.32; Braughton, 569 S.W.3d at 610-11. We 

conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the jury’s rejection of Appellant’s 

self-defense claim, and we overrule his issue. See Braughton, 569 S.W.3d at 613.

Having overruled Appellant’s issue, we affirm the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction.

AFFIRMED.

 LEANNE JOHNSON

Justice

Submitted on May 3, 2024

Opinion Delivered July 24, 2024

Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.