1 ... S ee Te x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 07- 358- CR
S T E P HE N R AYS M I T H AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 355TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F HO O D CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDUM OP I NI ON ON R E HEAR I NG 1

----- ----- -- A f t er r ec ons i der i ng our opi ni on on app el l ant ’ s m ot i on f or r ehe ar i n g , w e de ny t he m ot i on , bu t w i t hd r a w ou r op i ni on a nd j ud gm e nt da t e d Dec e m be r18, 20 08 , and subst i t ut e t he f ol l ow i ng t o cl ar i f y som e oft he f act s. I nt r oduc t i on A p p e l l a n t S tep h e n R a yS m i th ap p e a l s h i s c o n v i c ti o n fo r th e ft o f pro p e rt y
w i th a v a l u e b e tw e e n $ 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 a n d $ 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 . S ee Tex. Pen alCode Ann.2 ... K i serf i l ed a pol i ce r eport , and m or e t han a m onth l at er , he r ecei ved

a c a l l th a t th e tra v e l tra i l e r h a d b e e n fo u n d . W h e n K i s e r i d e n ti fi e d th e tra i l e r, he noti ced t hati t s si di ng had been t or n and i t s el ect r i cal conn ect i ons had been se ver ed.

3 ... Eve nt ual l y, Tor y V ann att a ( ano t her em pl oye e) r ec ei ved a ca l l i nf or m i ng hi m t hatt he t r uck s and s om e o ft he ot hereq ui pm entha d be en r ec ove r ed. 2 § 31. 03( e) ( 6) ( V er non Supp. 200 8) . I n t w o poi nt s, ap pel l antco nt end s t hatt he t r i al co urter r ed by f ai l i ng t o i ncl udean ac com pl i cew i t nes s i ns tru c ti o n i n t he j ury char ge and t hathe r ecei ved i nef f ect i ve assi st ance f r om hi s t r i al counsel b e c a u s e h i sc o u n s e l fa i l e d to re q u e s t s u c h a n i n s tru c ti o n . W e a ffir m . B a c k g rou n d F a c ts O n D e c e m b e r2 6 , 2 0 0 4 , A lt o n K is e rre c e iv e d a c a ll in f o r m in g h im t h a th is t r ave l t r ai l er had be en st ol en. 2Lesst han a m onth l at er , W ood y V annatt a, an
em pl oyee of Fl ow er s C onst r uct i on C om pany ( l ocat ed i n T em pl e, Texas) , ar r i ved
a tw o r k t o f in d t h a t t w o t r u c k s , a f la t b e d t r a ile r , a g e n e r a t o r , a n d v a r io u st o o ls
a n d eq u i p m e n t w e re m i ss i n g . C o m p a n yem p l o y e e s c a l l e d the p o l i c e to n o ti fy t hem oft he suspect ed t hef toft hese i t em s. 3On t hem or ni ng o fF e br ua r y 3, 200 5, B a r bi e Don Br am l ett , ow nerofBr am l ettI m pl em entCom pan y ( a J ohn D e e r e d e a le r s h ip ), re c e iv e d a c a ll f r o m a n e m p lo y e e a b o u ta b r e a k -in a th is busi ness. W hen B r am l et t ar r i ved at t he busi ness, he di scover ed t hatt he l ocks on hi s gat esha d be en cut . H e t hen not i ce d t hata l ong t r ai l er , a bl ac k p i ck up4 ... Br am l ettr ec ei ved a ca l l t hatt he pi ck up t ru c k h ad bee n f ound and

w ent w i th m em ber s oft he H ood Count y Sher i f f ’ s D epa rt m entt o i den t i f y t he t r uck. H e acknow l edged t hatt he t r uck bel ong ed t o hi s busi ness.

5 ... Th e ho us e t r a i l e r a pp e a r e d t o be un l i va bl e , a nd a pp e l l a nt s e e m e d to h a v e b e e n rem o d e l i n g i t. 3 tru c k , a c u s to m i z e d g e n e ra to r, a fo u r-w h e e l e r v e h i c l e , a n d tw o J o h n D e e re G at or( G at or ) ut i l i t y ve hi cl esha d be en st ol en. Tw o days l at er , H ood C oun t y S her i f f ' s O f f i ce S er geant S t eve S m i t h w as f l agged dow n by C li nt on S ul l i van and Jacki e M i t chel l , w ho had not i ced Bram l et t ’ sa b a n d o n e d b l a c kt r u c ki n f r o n to fa s h o p M i t c h e l l o wn e d . Aft er S er geant S m i t h saw t hat decal s had been gr oun d of foft he t r uck, he conf i r m ed t hat t he t r uck had be en st ol en. 4 Su l l i van t hen t ol d S er geant S m i t h t hathe had seen t he sam e bl ack t r uck al ong w i t h a G at or athi s nei ghb or ’ s house and t hat h e h a d s e e n a h e a v y -s e t w h i te m a n ri d i n g o n th e G a to r. Ser gea ntSm i t h a nd ot herof f i ce r s w e n t t o t he l oca t i on de sc r i bed by Sul l i van t o i nve st i gat e. U pon a r r i vi ng, Ser gea ntSm i t h not i ce d a G at oran d
se ver al ot herve hi cl esat th e p rope rt y, al ong w i t h f l oor i ng, i ns ul at i on, ha ul i ng t r ai l er s, and a l ar ge am oun t ofconst r uct i on t ool s and m at er i al s. A ppel l antw as out si de w or ki ng on an ol d hous e t r ai l erw hen t heyar r i ved . 5A ppel l antal l ow ed S e r g e a n tS m it h t o e x a m in e t h e G a t o r , a n d S e r g e a n tS m it h c o n f ir m e d t h a tit
w a s o n e o ft h e G a t o r st h a th a d b e e n s t o le n f r o m B r a m le t t . A p p e lla n tt o ld6 ... S e c ti o n 3 1 .0 9 o f th e p e n a l c o d e s ta te sth a t w h e n “ a m o u n ts a re

obtai ned . . . pur suant t o one schem e or conti nui ng cou r se ofcondu ct , w het her f r om t he sa m e o rs eve r als our c e s , th e c onduc tm ay be con si der ed asone o ffe n s e a n d th e a m o u n ts a g g re g a te d i n d e te rm i n i n g th e g ra d e o f th e o ffe n s e .” T e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § 3 1 .0 9 (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ). 4 S er geant S m i t h t hathe w as a part ow ner of t he r eal pr opert y w her e t he st ol en i t em s w er e l oca t ed. A m an nam ed ScottEl m or e t hen l eft a tr ave l t r ai l er , an d bot h hean d app el l antr ef us ed t o gi ve t he of f i ce r s con se ntt o f urt hers ea r ch t he t r ai l erort he
su rr o u n d i n g p rop e rt y . U p o n o b tai n i n g a s e a rch w a rr a n t, S e rge a n tS m i th
s e a rc h e d t he t r avel t r ai l erand f oun d t he keys t o B r am l et t ’ s bl ack t r uck,
m a rij u a n a , sy ri n g e s , a n d a g u n (w h i c h h a d a l s o b e e n re p o rte d s to l e n ). I n Sept em ber2 0 0 5 , a p pel l antw asi ndi ct ed f ort heft . The i ndi ct m ent al l eged t hatappel l antpart i ci pat ed i n a cont i nui ng cou r se ofcondu ctt hatw as i n te nde d t o de pr i ve Ki se r , V ann att a, an d Br am l ettofm or e t han $100 ,0 0 0
w ort h ofvar i ous i t em s of pr opert y, i ncl udi ng t hr ee pi ckup t r ucks, t w o G at or s, t w o ge ner at or s, and t hr ee t r ai l er s. 6The i ndi ct m ental so cont ai ned an enhan cem ent par agr aph al l egi ng t hat appel l ant had been pr evi ousl y convi ct ed7 ... T h o u g h t h e f to fp r o p e rt yv a lu e d b e t w e e n $ 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 a n d $ 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 is

a second degr ee f el ony, t he enhan cem entpar agr aph enab l ed t he S t at e t o seek p u n i s h m e n t fo r a fi rs t d e g re e o ffe n s e . S ee T e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § § 1 2 .4 2 (b ), 31. 03( e) ( 6) ( V er no n S u p p . 2008) . Appel l antpl ed t r ue t o t he enh anc em ent par agr aph’ s al l egat i on, and evi dence adm i t t ed att r i al f urt herest ablis h ed t hat t he al l egat i on w as t r ue.

8 ... A p p e l l a n t te s ti fi e d th a t h e p u rc h a s e d th e p ro p e rty w i th E l m o re to s to re ol d c ar s w hi ch he had co l l ec t ed.

9 ... Spec i f i ca l l y, El m or e t es t i f i ed t hatap pel l ant bough tt hr eet r ai l er s and a f ourwh e e l e rv e h i c l e t h a tE l mo r e h a d s t o l e n a n d t h a ta p p e l l a n tk n e w t hat t h e s e i t e mswe r e s t o l e n wh e n h e b o u g h tt h e m. 5 ofa f el ony d r ug off ense. 7App e l l a nt w e nt t o t r i a l b e f or e a j ury i n M a y 2006. Fol l ow i ng v oi rdi r e, ap pel l antpl ed notgui l t y. A t t r i al , S cot t El m or e ( w ho had sever al pr i orf el ony co nvi ct i ons) t est i f i ed t ha t h e h a d k n o wn a p p e l l a n t s i n c e 2 0 0 4 , t h a t h e r e c e i v e d mo neyan d
m e th a m p h e tam i n e fr o m ap p e l l a n t, an d tha t he h a d j o i n e d tog e th e r w i th
a p p e ll antt o pur chase t he r eal pr opert y w her e t he var i ous i t em s ofst ol en pr ope rty w e r e f ound. 8E l m o re a d m i tted tha t he sto l e p rop e rt yfr o m B ram l e tt I m pl em ent s and f r om Fl ow er s C onst r uct ion C om pany an d t est i f i ed t hat app el l antha d t he r i ght t o us e t he st ol en pr ope rt y i fhede si r ed, t hatap pel l ant
encou r aged hi m or ai ded hi m i n st eal i ng t he pr opert y, t hatappel l antpur chased
m o s t o f t he st ol en pr ope rt y, 9a n d t h a th e b o u g h tma r ij u a n a wi t h mo n e yt h at app el l antga ve hi m i n e xch ang e f ort he pr ope rt y.10 ... A tt he t i m e ofappel l ant ’ s t r i al , El m or e w as in c u s to dy and w as

a w a i ti n g tr i a l o n the sa m e c h a rge s a s th o se co n tai n e d i n ap p e l l a n t’ s i n d i c tm e n t. 6 A f t erot herw i t nes se s t es t i f i ed and co uns elco ncl ud e d t hei rcl os i ng
ar gum ent s, t he t r i al courtsubm i t t ed a char ge t o t he j ur y on t he t hef tof f ense. Th e char ge def i ned t hef t , gener al ly in fo r m ed t he j ur y abou tcr i m i nal
res p o n sibi l i ty, a n d sp e c i fi c a l l yi n stru c ted the j u ry th a t i f i t fo u n d tha t ap p e l l a n t, ei t heract i ng al one orw i t h El m or e, part i c ip a te d in a schem e ofcondu ctt hat i nt ended t o depr i ve t he ow ner s oft hei rpr opert y, t hen i tw as r equi r ed t o conv i ct hi m . H ow ever , t he char ge di d not contai n any i nst r uct i on r el at ed t o accom pl i ce
w i t nes se s ort he evi den t i ary e f f ec tofEl m or e’ s t es t i m ony, an d a ppe l l antdi d not
r equ es tan y s uch i ns t r uct i on orobj ec tt o i t s om i ss i on. The j ury f ound app el l ant gui l t y, f ound t hatt he enh anc em ent par agr aph i n t he i ndi ct m entw ast r ue, an d
ass e s sed puni shm entatni net y- ni ne year s’ conf i nem entand a $1 0, 00 0 fi ne. A p p e l l a n t fi l e d th i sa p p e a l . A cc om pl i ceW it nes s I ns t r uct i on I n h i s fi rst po i n t, a p p e l l a n t a ss e rt s th a t th e tr i a l c o u rt e rr e d b y fai l i n g to i ncl ude an i nst r uct i on i n t he j ur y char ge r egar di ng a c c o m pl i ce w i t ness t est i m ony. The S t at e concedes and w e hol d t hat El m or e w as an accom pl i ce as
a ma t t e r o f l a w a n d t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u rt e r r e d b y n o t i n c l u d i n g s u c h an i ns t r uct i on. 10 S e eCo ckev. S tate , 201 S . W .3 d 7 44, 748 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp.7

200 6) , c e rt. denied, 127 S . Ct . 1832 ( 200 7) . How eve r , be ca us e a ppe l l ant adm i t s t hathe m ade no r eq u e stt o t he t r i al courtt hatan accom pl i ce w i t ness i ns t r uct i on bei ncl ude d i n t he j ury’ s cha rg e , hem us tde m ons t r at e t hathe
s u ffe re d e g re g i o u sh a rm fro m th e i n s tru c ti o n ’so m i s s i o n . Herro nv. S tate , 86 S . W . 3d 62 1, 63 2 ( Tex . C r i m . A pp. 20 02 ) . I n ot h e r w or ds, appel l antm ust sh ow t hatan y c or r obor at i ng evi den ce not l i nke d t o a n a cc om pl i ce ’ s t es t i m ony i s “s o unc onvi nci ng i n f ac tast o r end ert he St at e’ s ove r al l ca sef orco nvi ct i on cl ear l y and si gni f i cant l y l ess per suasi ve. ” Id. ( quot i ng Sa un ders v. S tate , 817 S .W .2 d 6 8 8 , 6 9 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 )); se e a l so Jo n e sv. S tate , 195 S .W .3 d 2 7 9 , 2 8 9 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 6 ), a ff’d, 235 S. W . 3d 783 ( Tex. C r i m . A pp. 2007 ) ( exp l ai ni ng t hati f“ t he evi den cecl ea r l y w ar r ant s con vi ct i on i nde pen den toft he ac com pl i cet es t i m ony, t he t r i al cou rt ’ s f ai l ur e t o i ns t r ucton th e l a w o f a c c o m p l i c e te s ti m o n yi sn o t re v e rs i b l e e rro r” ). A convi ct i on “canno tbe had upo n t he t est i m ony o fan accom pl i ce unl ess
cor r obor at ed by o t herev i den cet end i ng t o c onne ctt he def end antw i t h t he of f ens e c om m i t t ed; an d t he cor r obor at i on i s not su f f i ci enti fi tm er el y s how s t he
com m i ss i on oft he of f ens e. ” Tex. Code Cr i m . Pr oc. A nn. art . 38. 14 ( V er non 2 0 0 5 ). I n o rde r t o b e an ac c o m p l i c e , th e p e rso n m u st b e s u s c e p ti b l e to pr osecut i on f ort he of f ense w i t h w hi ch t he accused i s char ged ora l esser8

i n c l u d e d o ffe n s e . S e e Me d i n av. S tate , 7 S. W . 3d 633, 641 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1 9 9 9 ), cert. denied, 5 2 9 U .S . 1 1 0 2 (2 0 0 0 ). W hen ev al uat i ng t he su f f i ci enc y ofco r r obor at i o n e vi den ceunde rt he
ac com pl i ce - w i t nes s r ul e, w e “ e l i m i nat e t he ac com pl i cet es t i m ony f r om
c o n s id e r a t io n a n d t h e n e x a m in e t h e re m a in in g p o rt io n s o f t h e r e c o r d t o s e e if t her e i s any evi dence t hatt ends t o c o nnect t he accused w i t h t he cr i m e. Ma lo n ev. S tate , 2 5 3 S. W . 3d 253, 257 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2008 ) ( quot i ng So lo m o nv. S tate , 49 S. W . 3d 356, 361 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 200 1) ) . To m ee tt he
r equ i re m e n ts oft he r ul e, t he cor r obor at i ng e vi den cene ed notpr ovet he d e fe n d a n t’s g u i l t b e y o n d a re a s o n a b l e d o u b t b yi ts e l f. Mal one , 25 3 S . W . 3d at 2 5 7 ; T revi n o v. S tate , 9 9 1 S .W .2 d 8 4 9 , 8 5 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 9 ); Gi l l v. S tate , 873 S . W . 2d 45, 48 ( Tex. C r i m . A pp. 199 4) . N ori s i tne ce ss ary f ort he
cor r obor at i ng e vi den cet o di r ec t l y l i nk t he ac cus ed t o t he com m i ss i on oft he
o ffe n s e . Ca th e y v. S tate , 9 9 2 S .W .2 d 4 6 0 , 4 6 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 9 ), c ert. denied, 528 U . S. 1082 ( 200 0) . Rat her , t he evi den cem u s t s i m p l y l i nk t he accused i n som e w ay t o t he com m i ssi on oft he cr i m e and show t hat“r at i onal j ur or s cou l d c onc l udet hatt hi s evi den ces uf f i ci ent l y t end ed t o c onne ct[ t he accused] t o t he of f ense. ” Mal one , 253 S. W . 3d at257 ( quot i ng Her nan dezv. S tate , 93 9 S . W . 2d 17 3, 17 9 ( Tex . C r i m . A pp. 19 97 ) ) . “I ndep enden tevi dence
w h i c h g e n e ral l yten d s to p rov e th a t a n a c c o m p l i c e w i tn e ss ’s v e rsi o n o f ev e n ts9

i s t r ue, r at hert han t he v er si on gi ven by the def endan t , i s consi der ed
cor r obor at i ve, ev en i fi tco nce r nsa m er e ‘ det ai l , ’ asoppo se d t o a s ubs t ant i ve l i nk bet w een t he def endan t and com m i ssi on of t he of f ense. ” Bea th a rd v. S tate , 7 6 7 S .W .2 d 4 2 3 , 4 3 0 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 9 ); se e a l so Mun o z v. S tate , 853 S .W .2 d 5 5 8 , 5 5 9 (T e x . C r im . A p p . 1 9 9 3 ) ( n o t in g t h a t“ [a ]p p a r e n t ly i n s i g n i fi c a n t i n c ri m i n a ti n g c i rc u m s ta n c e s m a ys o m e ti m e sa ffo rd s a ti s fa c to ry
e v i d e n c e o f c o rro b o ra ti o n ” ). Th e accom pl i ce- w i t ness r ul e i s a s t at ut or i l y i m posed suf f i ci ency r evi ew and i s not der i ved f r om f ede r alors t at e c ons t i t ut i ona l pr i nci pl est hatde f i ne t he l e g a l a n d fa c tu a l s u fficie n c ys ta n d a rd s . Cathey , 992 S. W . 2d at 462 –63 . The “t ends t o conn ect ” st andar d does not pr esenta hi gh t hr eshol d, and w e m ust appl y th e st andar d by vi ew i ng cor r obo r at i ng evi dence i n t he l i ght m ost fa v o ra b l e to th e v e rd i c t. S e eSi m m o n s v. S tate , 205 S . W . 3d 65, 73 ( Tex. A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 6 , n o p e t.); Ca n telo nv. S tate , 85 S. W . 3d 457, 461 ( Tex. A p p .— A u s ti n 2 0 0 2 , n o p e t.). H er e, ap pel l antco nt e n d s thathes uf f er ed egr egi ousha r m be ca us e h e
a ss e rt s th a t ab se n t Elm o re’s tes ti m o n y , n o e v i d e n c e l i n k s a p p e l l a n t t o the the ft schem e. The S t at e ar gues t hatappel l antdi d not suf f eregr egi ous har m because El m or e’ s t est i m ony w as suf f i ci ent l y cor r obo r at ed by otherevi dence.11 ... Th e r ecor d est abl i shed t hat another w i t ness atappel l ant ’ s t r i al , Li sa

D i a n e A t ki ns , m ay al so hav e bee n con nec t ed t o t he t heft sc hem e. A t ki n s , a c o n f e s s e d t h ie f o f o v e r t w o h u n d r e d c a r s , t e s t if ie d t h a ts h e h a d p r e v io u s lys o ld s t o le n p r o p e rt yt o a p p e lla n t a n d t h a t s h e h a d re c e iv e d d r u g sf r o m a p p e lla n tin exc han ge f or su ch pr ope rt y. Ther ef or e, w e w i l l notco ns i dert he t es t i m ony of A t ki ns( orEl m or e) i n de t er m i ni ng w h e th e r su f f i ci entco r r obor at i ng t es t i m ony w a s p re s e n te d . See Sol om on , 49 S . W . 3d a t361.
12 ... A tor alar gum ent , ap pel l ant ’ s cou ns elar gue d t hatSul l i v a n ’ s t es t i m ony r egar di ng app el l ant ’ s “gr i ndi ng” on t he t r uck w as not cr edi bl e because Su l l i van 10 W e c onc l udet hatt he r ec or d c ont ai nss uf f i ci entev i d enc e a partf r om
accom pl i ce t est i m ony t hat t ends t o conn ect appel l ant t o t he t hef ts c h em e
c h a rg e d in t h e i n d i c tm e n t. 11 Fir st, ap p e l l a n t j o i n tl yo w n e d the rea l p rop e rt y
w her e t he var i ous i t em s ofst ol en pr opert y w er e f oun d and st ayed overni ght at t he pr opert y on a f ew occasi ons. U pon appr oachi ng t he pr opert y t o i nvest i gat e, Ser gea nt Sm i t h f ound app el l ant on t he pr ope rt y nea r t he l oca t i on of so m e o ft he st ol en t ool s. N ext , C l i nt on S ul l i van, w ho l i ved neart he r eal pr opert y w her e t he st ol en i t em s w er e f oun d , test i f i ed t hathe saw appel l antr i di ng on one oft he st ol en G at or s. M or e i m port ant l y, Sul l i van s t at ed t hathes aw ap pel l ant“ gr i ndi ng” B ra m l e tt’ss to l e n b l a c k t r u c k , w h i c h h e l a te r fo u n d a b a n d o n e d a t M i tc h e l l ’s
s h o p , a n d a ls o s a w a p p e lla n t “ c u t t in g u p ” o t h e r c a r s . S u lliv a n c o r r e c t ly i den t i f i ed app el l ant f r om a phot o l i neu p as bei ng t he m an he had s ee n gr i ndi ng th e t r uck. 12Ser geant S m i t h t est i f i ed t hatw hen he f i r stsaw t he t r uck atst at ed t hat he saw t he i nci dent at abou t 11 : 30 p. m . H ow ever , w e m ustvi ew

th i s e v i d e n c e i n the l i g h t m o st fav o rab l e to th e v e rdict, a n d w e m u st d e fer to th e j u ry ’sre s o l u ti o n o f th e w i t n e s s ’sc re d i b i l i ty . See Si m m ons , 205 S .W .3 d a t 7 2

– 7 3 ; Clem en t v. S tate , 2 4 8 S .W .3 d 7 9 1 , 7 9 7 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 8 , n o p e t.).

13 ... T h e re c o rd i n d i c a te s th a t th e tru c k m a y h a v e b e e n l e ft a t M i tc h e l l ’s sh op be ca us e i tw ass t ucki n t he m ud. 11 M i t che l l ’ s sh op, he“ not i ce d t hat on t he pas se nge rs i de oft he t ai l gat e t hatpa i nt had be en gr ound dow n by w hatap pea r ed t o bean el ec t r i c g r i nde r. . . r em ovi ng
so m e d e c a l s fro m t he si de oft he veh i cl e. ” Br am l ettal so co nf i r m ed t hatt he t r uck’ s decal s, w hi ch i denti f i ed hi s com pany and pr ovi ded i t s pho ne num ber s, h a d b e e n g rou n d o ff. 13 A ppel l ant ’ s com m uni cat i ons w i t h t w o of t he w i t nesses w ho t est i f i ed at t r i al de m ons t r at ed con sc i ous nes s of hi s gui l tan d f urt herco nne ct ed hi m t o t he t hef tschem e. Fori nst a n c e , C a r ol Sch ot t , w ho sol d t he r eal pr opert y t hat appel l antand El m or e j oi nt l y pur chased ( as evi denced by a r eal est at e cont r act t hat app el l ant si gne d i n Jan uary 200 5) , t es t i f i ed t hats he r ec ei ved a l ett erf r om app el l antas ki ng he rt o con t ac t l aw enf or ce m ent and t el l t hem t hatheha d not ta ken any parti n pur chasi ng t he pr opert y. Scho t tunder st ood t hatt hi s l et t er asked hert o l i e f orappel l ant . Fi nal l y, S usan El m or e ( S cot t ' s m ot her ) t est i f i ed th ataft erSco t thad been ar r est ed f ort hef t , appel l antcal l ed herand t ol d her14 ... W e not e t hatappel l ant ’ s cr i m i nal i nt enti n pur chasi ng th e r eal

pr opert y, r i di ng on t he G a to r, g rin di ng offt he decal s, and m aki ng t hese com m uni ca t i onsm ay be pr ope r l y i nf er r ed by su ppl em ent i ng El m or e’ s t es t i m ony ( w hi ch m or e d i r ec t l y i m pl i ca t ed app el l ant i n t he sc hem e) . I n a t heftca se , t he act or ' s know ledge ori nt entm ay be est abl i shed by t he unco r r obo r at ed te s ti m o n yo f a n a c c o m p l i c e . T e x . P e n a l C o d e A n n . § 3 1 .0 3 (c )(2 ); s e eNe th ery v. S tate , 2 9 S .W .3 d 1 7 8 , 1 8 5

– 8 6 (T e x . A p p .— D a l l a s2 0 0 0 , p e t. re f’d ).

15 ... W i t hi n t he port i on ofap pel l ant ’ s br i e f r el at ed t o hi s f i r stpoi nt , he i ncl uded subh e a di ngs and a br i efanal ysi s r egar di ng l egal and f act ual su f f i ci enc y. How eve r , be ca us e t hi s ana l ys i s se em s t o r epe att he al l ega t i ons appel l ant in cl uded r egar di ng t he l ack ofcor r obo r at i ng evi dence, and because t h e a n a l y s i s c o n t a i n s n o c i t a t i o n t o a u t h o r i t i e s , we wi l l n o t a d d r e s s l e g a l or fa c tu a l s u fficie n c y a s i n d e p e n d e n t g ro u n d sfo r th i sa p p e a l . See D or nbus ch v. S tate , 2 6 2 S .W .3 d 4 3 2 , 4 3 8 n .3 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 8 , n o p e t.). 12 t h a tifS c o t tw o u ld “ t a k e t h e f a ll” f o rt h e t h e ftc h a r g e s , a p p e lla n tc o u ld “ h e lp h im w it h m o n e y ” a f t e rh e w a s re le a s e d f r o m ja il. W e h o ld t h a tt h e s e f a c t s , c o n s id e r e d c u m u la t iv e ly , s u f f ic ie n t ly
cor r obor at ed t he ac com pl i ce t es t i m ony by t end i ng t o con nec t app el l ant t o t he t hef tschem e; t her ef or e, no egr egi ous har m r es u lte d fr om t he l ack ofan i ns t r uct i on a boutac com pl i cew i t nes s t es t i m ony. 14 S e eSo lo mon , 49 S. W . 3d
a t 3 6 1 ; Cathey , 992 S . W . 2d at 462 ( exp l ai ni ng t hat i f “t he com bi ned w ei ght oft he non

- accom pl i ce evi dence t ends t o conn ect t he def endan tt o t he of f ense, t h e re q u ir e m e n t o f A r t i c le 3 8 .1 4h a sb e e n f u lf ille d ” ). W e t h e r e f o r e o v e r r u le
a p p e l l a n t’ s fi rst po i n t. 15 I neff ect i ve A ssi st ance ofC oun sel13

In h is s e c o n d p o in t , a p p e lla n ta r g u e s t h a th ist r ia l c o u n s e l g a v e h im i nef f ec t i ve as si st anc e b y f ai l i ng t o r equ es tan ac com pl i cew i t nes s i ns t r uct i on. To es t abl i sh i nef f ec t i ve as si st anc e o fco uns el , ap pel l a n t m us ts how by a pr epo nde r anc e o f t he evi den ce t hat hi s cou ns el ’ s r epr es ent at i on f el l bel ow t he
s t a n d a r d o fp r e v a ilin g p r o f e s s io n a l n o r m sa n d t h a tt h e r e isa re a s o n a b le pr oba bi l i t y t hat , but f or cou ns el ’ s def i ci enc y, t he r es ul toft he t r i alw oul d ha ve b e e n d i f f e re n t. Str

i ckl and v. W ashi ngton , 4 6 6 U .S . 6 6 8 , 6 8 7 , 1 0 4S . C t. 2 0 5 2 , 2 0 6 4(1 9 8 4 ); Sa l i n a s v. S tate , 163 S . W . 3d 734, 740 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 5 ); Ma l

le tt v. S tate , 6 5 S .W .3 d 5 9 , 6 2 -6 3 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 1 ); T h o mp so nv. S tate , 9 S .W .3 d 8 0 8 , 8 1 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 9 ). T h e se c o n d p ron g o f Str i ckl and re q u i re s a s h o w i n g th a t c o u n s e l ’se rro rs
w e r e s o s e r io u st h a tt h e yd e p r iv e d t h e d e f e n d a n to fa f a ira n d re lia b le t r ia l. S tr i ckl and, 4 6 6 U . S . a t 6 8 7 , 1 0 4 S . C t . a t 2 0 6 4 . I n o t h e r wo r ds , ap pel l ant
m u s t s h o w th e re i sa re a s o n a b l e p ro b a b i l i tyth a t, b u t fo r c o u n s e l ’s
u n p rofe ss i o n a l erro rs, th e res u l t of th e p roc e e d i n g w o u l d h a v e b e e n d i fferen t. Id. at 6 9 4 , 1 0 4S . C t. at 2 0 6 8 . A rea so n a b le p r o b a b i l i ty i s a p rob a b i l i ty
s u fficie n t to u n d e rm i n e c o n fi d e n c e i n th e o u tc o m e . Id. The u l t i m at e f ocu s of
o u rin q u ir ym u s t b e o n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l f a ir n e s so ft h e p r o c e e d in g w h o s e re s u lt i sb e i n g c h a l l e n g e d . Id. a t697, 104 S. Ct . a t2070 .16 ... C ourt s have not ed t hatf ai l ur e t o r equestan accom pl i ce w i t n ess

i n s tru c ti o n m a y re n d e r c o u n s e l ’sp e rfo rm a n c e d e fi c i e n t. See E x parte Zepeda , 8 1 9 S . W . 2 d 8 7 4 , 8 7 6

– 7 7 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 ); Ro b i n so nv. S tate , 665 S .W .2 d 8 2 6 , 8 3 1 (T e x . A p p .— A u s ti n 1 9 8 4 , p e t . r e f’d ) (d e s c ri b i n g c o u n s e l ’s fa i l u re to re q u e s t a n a c c o m p l i c e w i tn e s si n s tru c ti o n a sa “ g l a ri n g e rro r” ). 14 I n t hi s case, appel l ant ’ s i nef f ect i ve assi st ance cl ai m i s w hol l y pr edi cat ed
o n h isc o u n s e l’s f a ilu r e t o re q u e s t a n a c c o m p lic e w it n e s sin s t r u c t io n . E v e n if
w e w e r e t o a s s u m e t h a ta p p e lla n t ’s c o u n s e l’s p e r f o r m a n c e w a sle g a lly d e fi c i e n t, 16be ca us e w e h aveco ncl ude d t hat , de sp i t e n o i ns t r uct i on be i ng gi ven , t he accom pl i ce t est i m ony w as suf f i ci ent l y cor r obo r at ed by otherevi dence t hat ten d e d to c o n n e c t a p p e l l a n t t o the the ft sc h e m e , a p p e l l a n t ca n n o t de m o n strate th a t th e re s u l t o f h i stri a l w o u l d h a v e b e e n d i f f e re n t. S e eJo hn so nv. S tate , 23 4 S . W . 3d 43 , 56 ( Tex . A pp. — El Paso 20 07 , no pet . ) ( r easoni ng t hatbecause t he “n on- ac com pl i ceev i den ces u ffi ci ent l y c or r obor at ed t he ac com pl i cean d t end ed t o c onne ct [th e d ef end ant ] t o t he of f ens e . . . , t he r ec or d [ di d] not
es t abl i sh a r ea so nab l e p r oba bi l i t y t hatbut f or cou ns el ’ s er r or , t he r es ul toft he p ro c e e d i n g w o u l d h a v e b e e n d i ffe re n t” ); Ca siasv. S tate , 36 S . W . 3d 897, 902 ( Tex . A pp. — A ust i n 2 00 1, no pet . ) ( over r ul i ng an i nef f ect i ve assi st ance
ar gum entbecause t he cor r obo r at i ng evi dence w as suf f i ci ent t o t end t o conn ect th e d e fen d a n t t o the cri m e ). T h e refo re, w e o v e rr u l e ap p e l l a n t’ s s e c o n d p o i n t.15 C onc l us i on H avi ng ov er r ul ed bot h ofap pel l ant ’ s poi nt s, w e a f f i r m t he t r i alc o u rt’s j u d g m e n t. T E R R I E L I VI NGS T ON J U S T I C E
PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; an d L I V I N G STO N , J. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: J a nu a ry 29, 2009