1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 07- 023- CR
B R I AN DOU GL AS B L AC K AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M CRI M I NA LDI STRI CT CO URT NO . 3 OF TARRA NT CO UN TY

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

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I NTR ODUCTI ON A ppe l l antBr i an D ougl asBl ac k a ppe al s h i s c onvi ct i on f orhi nde r i ng t he appr ehensi on of a f el on. I n hi s sol e poi nt , appel l ant contends t hatt he evi dence
w a s l e g a l l yi n s u fficie n t to s u p p o rt h i s c o n v i c ti o n . W e a ffir m .2 F ACT UALAND P RO CEDU RA L B ACKGROUND S a n s o m P a r kd e t e c t iv e s a s k e d t h e F o rtW o rt h P o lic e D e p a rt m e n tt o a id t hem i n l oca t i ng St eph an M ar k Bl ac k ( M ar k) , ap pel l ant ’ s br ot her , i n c onne ct i on
w i t h i l l egal dr ug act i vi t i es. The Fo rtW ort h Po l i ce D epart m entl at erdi scover ed th a t M a rka l s o h a d a n o u ts ta n d i n g a rre s t w a rra n t i n O h i o . O n M a y 1 3 , 2 0 0 5 , t h e p o lic e lo c a t e d M a r k ’s c a ro u t s id e o fa M o t e l S ix i n T a rr a n t C o u n ty, a fter t rac k i n g h i s G e o rgia l i c e n se p l a te. A fter sp e a k i n g w i th
a s e c u ri tyg u a rd a t th e m o te l , th e p o l i c e , u ti l i z i n g M a rk ’s l i c e n s e p l a te n u m b e r, di scover ed t hata r oom had been r ent ed by app el l ant . Because M ar k w as kno w n t o us e a l i as es , t he pol i ce be l i eve d t her e w asa pos si bi l i t y t hatt he r oom had ac t ual l y be en r ent ed by M ar k. W hen t he pol i ce ap pr oa c h e d t he r oom , a p p el l antansw er ed t he doo rand i denti f i ed hi m sel f . A ppel l antt ol d t he pol i ce t hatM ar k w as hi s br ot her , but he deni ed t hat M ar k w as w i t h hi m and cl ai m ed t hathe had no t s e e n h is b rotheri n a w hi l e. The po l i ce, w ho di d not have a
se ar ch w ar r ant , ask e d a p p e l l anti ft heyco ul d s ea r ch t he r oom , an d he
c o n s e n te d . W h i l e s e a rc h i n g th e ro o m , th e p o l i c e fo u n d M a rkh i d i n g u n d e r a bed ; t heyal so f ound app el l ant ’ s w i f e, Lo i s Bl ac k, hi di ng un dert he ot herbe d. B e f o r e a p p e lla n tw a s a r r e s t e d , h e b e c a m e c o m b a t iv e a n d re f u s e d t o c o m p ly
w i t h t he of f i ce r s’ co m m and s. T h e of f i ce r s w er e f or ce d t o c ont r ol ap pel l ant
w i t h phy si ca l f or ce an d t he us e o fa t as er . Af t erhe w asde t ai ned , ap pel l ant3

apol ogi zed f orhi s behavi or and adm i t t ed t o t he pol i ce t hat he w as aw ar e t hat h i s b ro th e r w a s i n th e ro o m . O n Decem ber22, 2006 , a j ur y c onvi ct ed app el l an t fort he of f ens e o f hi nder i ng t he appr ehensi on of a f el on. Th e t r i al courtasses sed puni shm entat
s e v e n y e a r s ’ c o n f in e m e n t . A p p e lla n tt im e lyf ile d t h is a p p e a l. S TANDARD OF R EV I EW I n r evi ew i ng t he l ega l su f f i ci enc y oft he evi den ce t o s upporta con vi ct i on,
w e vi ew al l t he evi dence i n t he l i ght m ost f avor abl e t o t he pr osecut i on i n or der t o det er m i ne w het her any r at i onal t r i eroff actcoul d have f oun d t he essent i al
e l e m e n ts o f th e c ri m e b e y o n d a re a s o n a b l e d o u b t. Ja cks o nv. V ir gi n ia , 443 U .S . 3 0 7 , 3 1 9 , 9 9 S . C t. 2 7 8 1 , 2 7 8 9 (1 9 7 9 ); Cl a y to n v. S tate , 235 S. W . 3d 7 7 2 , 7 7 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ). T h i s s tan d a rd g i v e s fu l l p l a yto th e res p o n sibi l i ty o f t h e tr i e r o f fac t t o r esol ve confl i ct s i n t he t est i m ony, t o w ei gh t he evi dence, a n d to dr aw re a s o n a b l e i n fe re n c e s fro m b a s i c fa c ts to u l ti m a te fa c ts . Jacks on , 44 3 U . S . at 3 1 9 , 9 9 S . C t. a t 2 7 8 9 ; Cl ayton , 235 S . W . 3d at 778 . The t r i er of f ac ti s t he
s o l e j u d g e o f th e w e i g h t a n d c re d i b i l i ty o f th e e v i d e n c e . S ee T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . a rt. 3 8 .0 4 (V e rn o n 1 9 7 9 ); Ma rgra ves v. S tate , 34 S . W . 3d 912, 919 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 ). T h u s , w h e n p e rfo rm i n g a l e g a l s u fficie n c yre v i e w , w e m a yn o t r e -ev a l u a te th e w e i g h t an d cre d i b i l i ty o f t h e ev i d e n c e an d su b sti tu te4

o u r j u d g m e n t fo r th a t o f th e fa c t-fi n d e r. Dewber ry v. S tate , 4 S . W . 3d 735, 7 4 0 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 9 ), cert. denied, 5 2 9 U . S . 1 1 3 1 ( 2 0 0 0 ) . I n s t e a d , we “d et er m i ne w het hert he nec es sa r y i nf er enc e s a re r ea so nab l e b as ed upon t he
com bi ned an d c u m u l a ti v e f or ce ofal l t he evi den ce w hen vi ew ed i n t he l i ght
m ostf avor abl e t o t he ver di ct . ” Ho op er v. S tate , 214 S. W . 3d 9, 16- 17 ( Tex. C r i m . A pp. 2007 ) . W e m us tpr es um e t hatt he f ac t - f i nde rr es ol ved an y con f l i ct i ng i nf er enc esi n f avo rof t he pr os ec ut i on and def er t o t hatr es ol ut i on. Jacks on , 4 4 3 U .S . a t 3 2 6 , 9 9 S . C t. a t 2 7 9 3 ; Cl ayton , 235 S. W . 3d a t778. The s uf f i ci enc y oft he evi den ce sh oul d bem ea su r ed by t he el em ent s of t he of f ense as def i ned byt he hyp ot het i cal l y corr e c t j ur y char ge f ort he case. Ma l i kv. S tate , 9 5 3 S .W .2 d 2 3 4 , 2 4 0 (T e x . C r i m . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ); Bowdenv. S tate , 16 6 S . W . 3d 46 6, 47 0 ( Tex . A pp. — FortW ort h 2 00 5, pet . r ef ’ d) . Such
a c har ge w oul d beonet hatac cur ate l y s e ts o u tt he l aw , i s aut hor i z ed by t he i ndi ct m ent , doe s notunne ce ss ar i l y r es t r i ctt he St at e’ s t heo r i es of l i abi l i t y, an d ade qua t el y de sc r i bes t he part i cul arof f ens e f orw hi ch t he def end antw ast r i ed. G o l l i h a r v. S tate , 4 6 S .W .3 d 2 4 3 , 2 5 3 (T e x . C r i m . A p p . 2 0 0 1 ); Ma l i k, 953 S .W .2 d a t 2 4 0 . T h e l a w a s a u th o ri z e d b y th e i n d i c tm e n t m e a n s th e s ta tu to ry e l e m e n ts o f th e c h a rg e d o ffe n s e a s m o d i fi e d b yth e c h a rg i n g i n s tru m e n t. S ee Curryv. S tate , 3 0 S .W .3 d 3 9 4 , 4 0 4 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 ).5 A P P L I CAB L E L AW A per so n i s gui l t y of t he of f ens e o fhi nde r i ng t he app r ehe ns i on ofa f el on i f i t i s s h o wn t h a th e o rs h e i n t e n t i o n a l l yh i n d e r e d t h e a r r e s t , p r o s e cut i on, con vi ct i on, orpuni sh m entofan ot her f or an of f ens e b y ha r bor i ng orco nce al i ng t hat per s o n . T EX . P EN AL C ODE A NN . § 3 8 .0 5 (a )(1 ) (V e rn o n S u p p . 2 0 0 7 ). W het hert he def endan t possessed such an i nt entm ustor di nar i l y be est abl i shed b yc i rc u m s ta n ti a l e v i d e n c e . S e e Pa tri ckv. S ta te, 906 S. W . 2d 481, 487 ( Tex. C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 5 ), c ert. den i e d , 517 U .S . 1106 ( 199 6) ( i nt entm ay be d i s c e rn e d fro m th e a c ts , w o rd s , a n d c o n d u c t o f th e a c c u s e d ); K i ngv. S ta te, 76 S .W .3 d 6 5 9 , 6 6 1 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D i s t.] 2 0 0 2 , n o p e t.). A NA LYS IS A ppe l l antco nt end s t hatby al l ow i ng t he pol i ce t o s ea r ch hi s m ot el r oom
w hen he ha d a co ns t i t ut i ona l r i ght t o de ny t hem en t r y, he di d nothi nde rt he app r ehe ns i on ofM ar k b ut i ns t ea d al l ow ed t he pol i ce t o f i nd hi m . Bec aus e h e
w asce rt ai n t hat t he pol i ce w oul d f i nd M ar k i ft heys ea r che d t he m ot el r oom , app el l antar gue s t hathe di d notha ve t he i nt ent t o con ce alorha r borM ar k. The
r ec or d de m ons t r at es , how eve r , t hatt he j ur y hea r d t es t i m ony f r om O f f i ce rJoh n G a llo w a ya n d C o r p o r a l K .W . S t a c k , w h o b o t h t e s t if ie d t h a ta p p e lla n th a d t o ld pol i ce t hatM ar k w as noti n t he m ot el ro o m w h en appel l antknew ot her w i se. A ddi t i onal l y, t he evi dence show s t hatappel l antcl ai m ed t hathe had no tseen6

hi s br ot heri n a w hi l e. Furt her m or e, appel l ant t est i f i ed t hathe knew hi s br ot her
w as on par ol e, t hatt he pol i ce had an ar r est w ar r ant f orM ar k, and t hathe l i ed t o t he pol i ce t o pr ot ec t M ar k. A ppe l l ant ’ s t es t i m ony t o t he pol i ce t ha t M a rk
w as nott her e and t hathe had no tseen hi m served t o conceal or har borM ar k, i f o n l yfo r a s h o rt ti m e . S e eK i ng, 76 S. W .3 d a t 6 61 ( f i ndi ng t hat ci rc um st ant i al evi dence dem onst r at ed t he def endan t ’ s i nt entt o hi nder
a p p rehe ns i on ofpa r ol ee w hen de f end antan sw er ed t he doort o pa r ol e e ’s
re s i d e n c e a n d l i e d to p o l i c e , d e n y i n g th a t p a ro l e e w a s a t re s i d e n c e ); Sanf ord v. S ta te, N o . 1 2 -0 4 -0 0 3 3 0 -C R , 2 0 0 6 W L1 1 1 9 2 5 7 , a t * 2 (T e x . A p p .— T y l e r A p r. 28 , 20 06 , pet . r ef ’ d) ( m em . op. , notdesi gnated f orpubl i cat i on) ( hol di ng t hat t her e w as a r easonabl e i nf er ence oft he i nt entt o conceal w hen app el l antl i ed t o p o lic e a b o u ta p e r s o n b e in g in t h e b a c ks e a t o f h e r c a ra s p o lic e w e r e c le a r ly
se ar chi ng f ort hatpe r so n) . I fap pel l antha d be en su c c e ss f ul i n hi s dec ept i on and i ft he pol i ce ha d notdi l i gen t l y pr oce ede d w i t h t hei rs ea r ch f orM ar k b y as ki ng f orap pel l a nt ’ s con se ntt o s ea r ch t he r oom , ap pel l antw oul d ha ve p re v e n te d th e m fro m l o c a ti n g M a rka t th e m o te l . V i ew i ng t he evi dence i n t he l i ght m ost f avor abl e t o t he ver di ct , a r at i onal tr i e r of fac t co u l d h a v e fou n d b e y o n d a re a so n a b l e d o u b t t h a t t h e S tate
es t abl i sh ed t he es se nt i al el em ent s ofhi nde r i ng t he app r ehe ns i on ofa f el on by sh ow i ng t hatap pel l ant i nt end ed t o hi nde rM ar k’ s app r ehe ns i on byco nce al i ng7

hi m w hi l e know i ng t hathe w as w ant ed by t he pol i ce f orcom m i t t i ng an off ense. S ee T EX . P EN AL C ODE A NN . § 3 8 .0 5 (a )(1 ); se e a l soJa ckso n , 443 U. S. a t319, 9 9 S . C t. at 2 7 8 9 . T h e refo re, w e o v e rr u l e ap p e l l a n t’ s s o l e p o i n t. C ON C L U S I ON H a v i n g o v e rru l e d a p p e l l a n t ’s s o l e p o i n t, w e a ffir m th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

P E R CU R I AM
PA N EL F: LI V I N G STO N , J. ; CA YC E, C. J. ; an d DA U PH I N O T, J. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Apr i l 24, 2008