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

# COU RT OF APPE A LS S E CON D D I S T R I CT OF T E XAS

FORT W O RTH NO
. 2- 08- 398- CR
K E L L Y ONY E CH E AP P E L L ANT V
. TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 213TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

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

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I. I NTR ODUC TI ON A ppe l l antKel l y O nye che ap pea l s hi s con vi ct i on for ag grava t ed robbe r

y. I n four poi nt s, he argue s t hatt he evi den ce i s l eg al l y a nd fac t ual l y i ns uf fi ci ent a n d t h a tt h e t r ia l c o u rta b u s e d it s d is c re t io n b y o v e r ru lin g h is ru le 4 0 1 a n d ru le 4 0 3 o bj e c ti o n s . W e w i l l a ffirm .2 II. F AC TUA L AN D P ROCEDUR AL B AC KG ROUND I n Ju l y 2007, A l vi n C art er, K evi n A nde rso n, M arcusK nox, an d Appel l ant devi sed a pl an t o rob S i d’ s Fo od S t ore, a sm al l co nveni ence st ore att he cor ner of M cCartan d Sout h Pa r k i n Fo rtW ort h. Appel l antw as t o provi de tra n s p o rta ti o n fo r th e o th e r th re e , w h o w o u l d e n te r a n d ro b th e s to re . A ppe l l ant l i ved i n hi s parents’ hous e w i t h hi s gi r l fr i end , Ti ara Be ns on. She h a d h e l p e d A p p e l l a n t b u y h i s c a r , a lig h t b l u e P o n ti a c B o n n e v i l l e w i th a d a rk bl ue t op. O n Ju l y 15, 200 7, at around 2: 00 p. m . , A ppe l l ant and Ti ara t ook t he car t o pi ck up K e v i n and t o drop off Ti ara att he hou se of K evi n’ s A unt Faye, pas si ng Si d’ s Food S t ore al ong t he w ay. Aft er droppi ng of

f Ti ara, A ppe l l ant and K evi n conti nued t o M arcus’ s house and pi cked up M arcus and A l vi n (al so know n as A dam ) , w ho w ere w ai ti n g i n t he st reetoutfront. A ppel l antt hen d ro v e th e c a r to S i d ’s F o o d S to re . Just i n N ew by w as l ooki ng ou thi s w i ndo w o n A m ber D r i ve, a st reet runn i ng paral l el t o M cC artbehi nd S i d ’s F ood Store, w hen he no t i ced a l arge, l i g h t blue , 1 9 8 0 s m o d e l ca r pa rke d i n fro n t of th e h o u se ac ros s th e stree t. Three you ng bl ac k m en sa ti n t he ca r for ab outt hree m i nut es be fore o ne i n t he fro n t p a s s e n g e r s e a t c lim b e d o u t , s p o k e b r ie fly w it h s o m e o n e w a lk in g a d o g in t he st reet , and t hen disappeared aroun d t he cor ner t ow ard S i d’ s Food S t ore. Th e m an i n t he back seatt hen m oved up t o t he front and, w hi l e t he dr i ver w as3

t al ki ng on a ce l l phon e, t he ca r rol l ed dow n Am ber D r i ve and t ur ned around. A s t he car

appro a c h e d J u sti n’ s house on t he ret ur n, i tm ett he m an w ho had c lim b e d o u tm in u t e s b e fo re , w h o w a s w a lk in g ra p id ly a n d t a lk in g o n h is c e ll p h o n e . H e re -e n te re d th e c a r, a n d i t tu rn e d o n to S o u th P a rk a t th e c o rn e r. Jus t i n t hough tpe r hap s t he m en w ere abo ut t o st ea l be er from t he st ore s o he g o t a g o o d l o o k a t th e c a r. A ppe l l antpa r ke d t he ca r on t he st ree tb eh i nd Si d’ s Food St ore. Al vi n, M a rc u s , a n d K e v i n a l l g o t o u t a n d w a l k e d to w a rd th e s to re . A ro u n d 2 :1 5 p .m ., C a ro l y n H u n te r w a s h e a d i n g w e s tb o u n d o n S o u th P a rk t o a car w ash w hen she saw tw o youn g m en “creepi ng” aroun d t he back cor ner o f S id ’s F o o d S t o re . O n e o f t h e m w a s t a lle r

t h a n t h e o t h e r , w a s w e a r in g p u r p le l at ex gl ove s, an d w asca r r yi ng a p art i al l y c onc ea l ed han dgun. The sh ort er of t he tw o w asdres se d i n bl ac k “from head t o t oe. ” The t al l er one ke ptl ook i ng i n to th e s to re , a n d b o th o f th e m m o v e d s l o w l y a s i f to a v o i d b e i n g n o ti c e d
. A hm ad A w de not i ce d t he m en as w el l
. A hm ad, w ho w as a se ven t ee nyear - ol d fi rst
- year col l ege st uden t and w hose fam i l y ow ned Si d’ s Food Store, w as w or ki ng al one beh i nd t he coun t er . Som et i m e aroun d 2 : 00 p. m . , he saw m en l oi t er i ng a round out si de and atone poi ntope ni ng t he door a nd pe ek i ng i n s i d e .4

Betw ee n 2: 15 and 2 : 30, K el vi n H enr y and Shei l a M ur ray— vi si t i ng from G eorgi a— pul l ed up t o t he frontof Si d’s F oo d S t ore a nd w enti ns i de t o buy l ot t ery t i cket s. A ft er m aki ng t hei r

purchase, t hey ret ur ned t o t hei r car w h e re u p o n K e l v i n re a l i z e d th a t h e h a d to g o t o t h e re s tro o m . W i th th e s to re app arent l y e m pty, t he sh ort er of t he m en w ho ha d be en l oi t er i ng ou t si de of t he s to re w e n t i n s i d e . K el vi n got out of

h i s car an d w al ked back i nt o t o t he st ore. O n t he w ay t o t he m en’ s room , he noti ced a youn g bl ack m an i n t he m i ddl e partof an ai sl e, a b o u t 5 '7 " t a l l , w e a ri n g a b l a c k fi sh i n g h a t a n d a b l a c k T -sh i rt a n d tal k i n g i n to a c e l l p h o n e . K e l v i n s te p p e d i n to th e re s tro o m . The m an i n t he fi sh i ng ha tap proac hed t he cou nt er asA hm ad st epp ed up t o hel p hi m . W i t hou ta w ord, the m an pul l ed out a h andg un, sl i d back t he sl i de, a n d s h o t A h m a d i n th e to rs o fro m a d i s ta n c e o f l e s s th a n tw o fe e t. Kel vi n ha d be en i n t he res t room for abo ut fi ve m i nut es an d w as ge t t i ng rea dy t o c om e o utw hen he he ard a “ pop” an d a “bo om ” fol l ow ed by scream i ng. Shei l a h ad been scrat chi ng l ot t er y t i cket s i n t he car

outfront w hen sh e h ea rd a “fi rec rac ke r bang” and t hen a “b oom . ” A ppe l l ant , w ho w as w ai t i ng i n t he car behi nd Si d’ s Food S t ore, al so heard t he gun shot
. H e knew A l vi n had s h o t th e g u n b e c a u s e A p p e l l a n t h a d s e e n A l v i n w i th a g u n e a rl i e r.5

Th e bul l etpenet rat ed A hm ad’ s r i ght ar m , ent ered t hroug h hi s r i bc a ge, d a m a g e d s e v e ra l i n te rn a l o rg a n s , a n d c a u s e d h i s s p i n a l c o rd to s w e l l . A h m a d ’s l egsw entnum b a nd he fel l ag ai ns t t he i nve nt or y be hi nd t he cou nt er, s ca t t er i ng i t a c ro s s th e fl o o r. T h e m a n w i th th e p u rp l e g l o v e s b u rs t i n to th e s to re , v a u l te d th e c o u n te r, a n d g ra b b e d th e c a s h re g i s te r. B o th m e n fl e d
. Shei l a s aw you ng m en runni ng ou tof t he st ore w ea r i ng ba nda nas . O ne w i t h pur pl e gl ove s w ascar r yi ng a ca sh regi st er . They ran around t he st ore a nd p i l e d i n to A p p e l l a n t’s c a r. K e l v i n c a re fu ll y p e e k e d o u t o f th e m e n ’s roo m d o o r. H e w a l k e d o u t t o se e t he st ore i n di sa r ray. The ca sh regi st er w as gone . Ahm ad w as l ayi ng on hi s bac k beh i nd t he cou nt er am ong sc at t ered i nve nt or y i n a w i deni ng po ol of bl ood
. H e w as scream i ng, i n ext rem e pai n, and bl eedi ng profusel y. H e yel l ed fo r K e l v i n to g rab so m e tow e l s a n d h e l p h i m . K e l v i n h a d n o ce ll p h o n e w i th hi m , butA hm ad had m ana ged t o c al l 911 hi m se l f be fore Kel vi n c am e t o he l p. Pol i ce and param edi cs ar r i ved w i t hi n m i nutes . By t he t i m e C arol yn H unter had na vi gat ed t he sh ort dr i ve t o H ul en and Syca m ore Sch ool Road, w here s he st oppe d t o t el l of

fi ce rs abo utt he m en sh e h ad se en “c ree pi ng” aroun d t he s to re , o ffice rs w e re a l re a d y d i s p a tc h e d to th e s c e n e .6

Fi ft ee n t o tw enty m i nut es aft er Jus t i n New by fi rsts aw t he su sp i ci ous b lu e c a r p a r k e d a c ro s s t h e s t re e t , o n e o f h is p a re n t s c a m e h o m e a n d t o ld h im th a t t h e p o l i c e w e re a t S i d ’s F o o d S to re. Ju sti n w a l k e d aro u n d the co rne r t o reportw hathe had seen. H e descr i bed t he bl ue car , i ncl udi ng a part i al l i cense p l a te n u m b e r, to O ffice r D a v i d H u g h e s . A ppel l antd rove t o M arcus’ s ho use, an d t he m en proceeded to pr y open t he cash regi st er

an d di vi de i t s con t ent s— approxi m at el y $8 00
— betw een t hem
. A roun d 3 : 00 or

3: 30 p. m . , A ppel l antret ur ned w i t h K evi n t o A unt Faye’ s house, w h e re h e h a d l e ft T i a ra. T i a ra re l a y e d th a t A u n t F a y e h a d c a l l e d h e r en rou te to v i s i ti n g he r

m othe r an d h ad sai d tha tshe ha d se en a l ot of po l i ce at Si d’s F o o d S to re . A p p e l l a n t a c te d “ c l u e l e s s l i k e h e d i d n ’t k n o w w h a t w a s g o i n g o n .” A fte rw a rd , h e w a s “ i n a n d o u t” a l l a fte rn o o n u n ti l h e c a m e b a c k to d ri v e T i a ra h o m e aro u n d 7 :3 0
. A t so m e p o i n t i n th e a ftern o o n , T i a ra sa w A p p e l l a n t w i th a w a d o f c a s h th a t h e s a i d h e h a d w o n p l a y i n g d i c e . A ppel l antw as atM arcus’ s house w i t h M arcus, A l vi n, K evi n, and R odn ey Eva ns s hoot i ng di ce around 7: 45 or 8: 00 t hatni ght
. Pl ayi ng w i t h c as h, A p p e l l a n t w h i sp e red to R o d n e y , “[W ]e h i t a li c k ,” w h i c h R o d n e y u n d e rsto o d to m ean t hat t he m en had robb ed som eone. Som et i m e aft er t he robb er

y, Ro dney saw a pai r

of pur pl e gl oves i n t he ba c k se a tof A ppel l ant ’ s car

and a cash re g i s te r a t M a rc u s ’s h o u s e .7

FortW ort h Robbe r

y Det ec t i ve John Li ves ay w as as si gne d t he ca se . The day aft er

t he robbe r

y, A hm ad’ s brot her

M uha m m ad gav e Det ec t i ve Li ves ay a possi b l e li c e n se pl at e num ber for t he get aw ay car : 44 4 D M V
. That num ber w asregi st ered t o a Toyot a, buti tw as s i m i l ar t o t he part i al num ber gi ven by J u s ti n : 4 4 D o r D 4 4 . D e te c ti v e L i v e s a y b ro a d c a s t th e l i g h t b l u e c a r’s d e s c ri p ti o n a n d th e p a rti a l l i c e n s e p l a te n u m b e rs . O n Jul y 17 , tw o days aft er the robb er

y, O f fi cer M ark H er nand ez s pott ed a s k y bl ue Po nt i a c Bo nn e vi l l e a t M c Cart a nd W e s t Cl e bu r ne w i t h expi red i n s p e c t i o n a n d re g i s t ra t i o n s t i c k e rs a n d t h e l i c e n s e p l a t e n u mb e r 4 4 4 DW M
. Pat rol u n i t s p u l l e d i to v e r a ta 7
- E l e v e n p a r k i n g l o t . T i a ra w a s d r i v i n g , a nd A ppe l l ant w as i n t he pas se nge r se at . W hen t he ca r st oppe d, A ppe l l ant gotout a n d tri e d to p u t s o m e d i s ta n c e b e tw e e n h i m s e l f a n d th e c a r— w a l k i n g to w a rd t he rear

of t he st ore— before an offi c e r d i rect ed hi m t o st op. Pol i ce phot ograph ed t he ca r an d i t s occ upa nt s. Thatni ght , A ppe l l antrent ed a room a t M o te l 6 , p a y i n g c a s h fo r h i m s e l f, T i a ra , M a rc u s , A l v i n a n d R o d n e y . T h e p o l i ce show ed Just i n pho t os of t he vehi cl e t hatt hey had st opp ed aft er t he robbe r

y, an d Ju st i n w as “ a h undred perce nts ure” t hatt hey w ere o f t he ca r he ha d s ee n t he day of t he robbe r

y. He sp ec i fi ca l l y rem em bered t he u n u s u a l s l a n t o f th e d ri v e r’s s i d e w i n d o w .8

W hen D et ec t i ve Li ves ay di sc ove red t he con nec t i on betw ee n A ppe l l ant and t he ca r

s een a round Si d’ s Food St ore a tt he t i m e o f t he robbe r

y, he req u e ste d the d e p a rt m e n t’ s S W A T u n it to foll o w the ca r f o r a few d a y s to i dent i f y ot he rs w ho m a y be i nv ol ve d a nd t o i nt e r ve ne i n t he e ventt hey at t em pt ed an ot her

robbe r y. L i ves ay com pi l ed a p hot o s prea d, w hi ch he fo r w a rd e d t o a d e t e c t iv e in G e o rg ia w h o t h e n s h o w e d itt o K e lv in H e n r y . K e lv in recogn i zed A l vi n i n one of t he pho t os as t he m an he had seen i n t he fi shi ng hat a t S i d ’s F o o d S to re ri g h t b e fo re th e s h o o ti n g . O n J u ly 2 7 , D e t e c t iv e L iv e s a y d ro p p e d b y A p p e lla n t ’s h o u s e a n d le fth is ca rd w i t h Appel l ant ’ s m ot her
. A ppe l l ant ca l l ed t he det ec t i ve l at er t hatda y, an d aft er a few m i ss ed app oi nt m ents, he an d Ti ara v i si t ed t he det ec t i ve’ s of fi ce on Jul y 30. D etecti ve Li ves ay i nt er vi ew ed A ppe l l antan d Ti ara s epa rat el y a bout t he eventsof

Jul y 15 . A ppel l ant ’ s and Ti ara’ s versi ons di d not m at ch. A ft er A ppel l antw as confronted w i t h di screpanci e s b e tw een hi s accountand t hose of ot her w i t nesses, A ppel l ant di ct at ed a confes si on, adm i t t i ng t hathe had been th e g e ta w a y d ri v e r i n th e S i d ’s F o o d S to re ro b b e ry . A ppe l l antw ast r i ed asa party for t he robbe r

y a tSi d’ s Food St ore. The j ur y ret ur ned a verdi ctof gui l ty and assessed puni shm entatfo u rt e en years’ c o n fi n e m e n t.9 III. S UFFICI ENCY OF THE E VIDENCE I n hi s fi rstand second poi nt s, A ppel l antchal l enges t he l egal and fact ual suf fi ci ency of t he evi dence t o suppo rth i s c o n vi ct i on, argui ng i n both poi nt s, “The St at e o f

Texa s di d notm ee ti t s burden of proof, p roof

be yond a reasonabl e doub t , i n t hat i t fai l ed t o prove t hat A ppel l ant com m i t t ed t he offense a s i s s e t o u t i n th e i n d i c tm e n t.” The i ndi ct m ental l ege d t hatA ppe l l antcom m i t t ed aggrava t ed robbe r y by i nt ent i ona l l y or

know i ngl y, w hi l e i n t he cou rse of co m m i t t i ng t heftof

prope rty, a n d w it h in t e n tt o o b t a in o r m a in t a in c o n t ro l o f t h e p ro p e rty , c a u s in g b o d ily i nj u ry to A h m a d b y s h o o ti n g h i m w i th a f i re a rm , a d e a d l y w e a p o n . T h e c o u rt’s cha rg e a u t h o r i z e d t h e j u r y t o c o n v i c t i f t h e e v i d e n c e s h o w e d b eyo nd a rea so nab l e d oubtt hatA ppe l l antac t ed as a party. A ppel l antdi d not di sput e t hatt here had b e e n a n ag gravat ed robb er y at S i d ’s F o o d S to re d u ri n g w h i c h A h m a d h a d b e e n i nj u re d b y a g u n s h o t; h i s th e o ry att r i al w ast hathe ha d notbe en i nvol ved
. I n cl os i ng a rgum ent , co uns el for A ppe l l antargue d: N ot hi ng i n t hi s c a s e pu t s [ Appe l l a nt ] i n t ha t s t ore , a rou nd t hat st ore, rec ei vi ng proce eds of any of t hi s robbe r y, ha vi ng a ny s ortof in t e n to r

p la n t o a id w h o e v e r d id t h is
. H e is ju s tn o tg u ilty . H e is n o t g u i l ty a s th e p ri n c i p l e [s i c ] a c to r. H e i s n o t g u i l ty a s a p a rty .10 A
. St andards of

Rev i ew 1. Legal Su f

fi ci ency S t andard of Rev i ew I n revi ew i ng t he l ega l s uf fi ci enc y of t he evi den ce t o s upporta con vi ct i on, w e v ie w a ll o f

t h e e v i d e n c e in t h e lig h tm o s tfa v o ra b le t o t h e p ro s e c u t io n in order t o de t erm i ne w het her an y rat i ona l t r i er

of fac tco ul d ha ve found t he e s s e n ti a l e l e m e n ts o f th e c r im e b e y o n d a re a s o n a b l e d o u b t. Jac ks on v . V irg in ia , 4 4 3 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 ); C l a y to n v . S tate , 2 3 5 S .W .3 d 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 y t o t h e re sp o n sibi l i ty o f t h e tr i e r of fac t t o resol ve confl i ct s i n t he t est i m ony, t o w ei gh t he evi dence, and t o draw 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 . Jac ks on , 44 3 U
. S
. at 3 1 9 , 9 9 S . C t. a t 2 7 8 9 ; C l ayt on , 235 S. W
. 3d at778. The t r i er of fac 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 e x . C o d e C r i m. P ro c . A n n . a rt. 3 8 .0 4 (V e rn o n 1 9 7 9 ); B row n v . S tate , 270 S. W
. 3d 564, 568 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 8 ), cert . deni ed , 12 9 S
. C t . 20 75 ( 20 09 )
. Thu s, w hen perfor m i ng a l ega l su f fi ci enc y revi ew , w e m ay notre- eva l uat e t he w ei ghtan d c re d i b i l i ty o f th e e v i d e n c e a n d s u b s ti tu te o u r j u d g m e n t fo r th a t o f th e fa c tfin d e r. D e w b e rr

y v . S tate , 4 S .W .3 d 7 3 5 , 7 4 0 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 9 ), cert . deni ed , 5 2 9 U .S . 1 1 3 1 (2 0 0 0 ). I n s te a d , w e “ d e te rm i n e w h e th e r th e n e c e s s a ry in fe re n c e s a re re a s o n a b le b a s e d u p o n t h e c o m b in e d a n d c u m u la t iv e fo rc e o f a ll11

t he evi dence w hen vi ew ed i n t he l i ght m ostfavorabl e t o t he verdi ct . ” H oop er v . S tate , 2 1 4 S
. W
. 3 d 9 , 1 6
– 1 7 ( T e x . C r i m. A p p . 2 0 0 7 )
. We mu s tp re s u me t hatt he fac t fi nde r

res ol ved an y c onfl i ct i ng i nferenc es i n favor of t he p ro s e c u ti o n a n d d e fe r to th a t re s o l u ti o n . Jac ks on , 4 4 3 U .S
. a t 3 2 6 , 9 9 S
. C t. a t 2 7 9 3 ; C l ayt on , 235 S. W
. 3d a t778.

2. Fact ual Su f

fi ci ency S t andard of Rev i ew W h e n revi ew i ng t he fact ual suf fi ci ency of t he evi dence t o suppo rt a con vi ct i on, w e v i ew al l t he evi den ce i n a ne ut ral l i ght , favo r i ng ne i t her pa rty. S tea d m a n v . S tate , 2 8 0 S .W .3 d 2 4 2 , 2 4 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 9 ); W at so n v. S tate , 20 4 S
. W
. 3d 40 4, 41 4 (Tex
. C r i m . A pp. 2 0 0 6 ). W e t hen ask w het her t h e e v id e n c e s u p p o rt in g t h e c o n v ic t io n , a lt h o u g h le g a lly s u f fic ie n t , is nev ert hel es s so w ea k t hatt he fac t fi nde r’ s det erm i nat i on i s cl ea r l y w rong a nd m ani fes t l y u nj us tor w het her

co nfl i ct i ng e vi den ce s o grea t l y ou tw ei ghs t he e v id e n c e s u p p o rt in g t h e c o n v ic t io n t h a tt h e fa c t fin d e r’s d e t e r m in a t io n is m a n i fe s t ly u nj u s t. Steadm an , 2 8 0 S .W .3 d a t 2 4 6 ; W at so n , 20 4 S
. W
. 3d at 4 1 4
– 1 5 , 4 1 7 . T o rev e rse u n d e r t h e se c o n d g rou n d , w e m u st d e term i n e , w i th so m e o bj ec t i ve bas i s i n t he rec ord, t hatt he grea tw ei ghtan d prepo nde ranc e o f a ll t h e e v i d e n c e , a l th o u g h l e g a l l y s u fficie n t, c o n tra d i c ts th e v e rd i c t. W at so n , 2 0 4 S .W .3 d a t 4 1 7 .12

U n l e s s w e c o n c l u d e t h a t i t i s n e c e s s a ry t o c o rre c t m a n i fe s t i nj u s ti c e , w e m ustgi ve due deference t o t he fact fi nder ’ s det er m i nat i ons, “part i cul ar l y t hose det er m i nat i ons concer ni ng t he w ei ght and credi bi l i ty of t he evi dence. ” John so n v . S tate , 2 3 S .W .3 d 1 , 9 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 ); see St eadm an , 280 S. W
. 3d at246. Evi den ce i s al w ays fac t ual l y s uf fi ci entw hen i tprepo nde rat es i n favo r o f th e c o n v i c ti o n . S t eadm an , 2 8 0 S .W .3 d a t 2 4 7 ; se e W at so n , 20 4 S
. W
. 3d a t 4 1 7 . I n d e term i n i n g w h e th e r th e e v i d e n c e i s fa c tu a l l y i n su ffi c i e n t t o su p p o rta con vi ct i on t hati s nev ert hel es s su pport ed by l ega l l y s uf fi ci entev i den ce , i ti s not e n o u g h tha t t h i s c o u rt“h a rbo r a su bj e c ti v e l e v e l o f re a so n a b l e d o u b t to overt ur n [ t he] convi ct i on. ” W at so n , 204 S. W
. 3d at417. W e c ann otco ncl ude t h a t a c o n v ic t io n is c le a r ly w ro n g o r m a n ife s t ly u nju s t s im p ly b e c a u s e w e w o u ld h a v e d e c i d e d d i ffe re n tl y th a n th e j u ry o r b e c a u s e w e d i s a g re e w it h t h e j u ry ’s re s o l u ti o n o f a c o n fl i c t i n th e e v i d e n c e . Id
. W e m ay nots i m pl y s ubs t i t ut e o ur j u d g m e n t fo r th e fa c tfin d e r’s . John so n , 2 3 S .W .3 d a t 1 2 ; C a i n v . S tate , 958 S .W .2 d 4 0 4 , 4 0 7 (T e x . C r im . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ). U n le s s t h e re c o rd c le a r ly re v e a ls t hata di f

ferent res ul t i s app ropr i at e, w e m us t def er t o t he j ur

y’ s det erm i nat i on of t he w ei ght t o be gi ven con t radi ct or y t es t i m oni al ev i den ce be ca us e res ol ut i on of t he con fl i ct“oft en t ur ns on a n e val uat i on of credi bi l i ty a nd de m ea nor, an d t hose j urors w ere i n at t endan ce w hen t he t est i m ony w as del i vered. ” John so n ,13

23 S. W
. 3d at8
. O ur deferenc e i n t hi s rega rd s afegu ards t he def end ant ’ s r i ght t o a t r i a l b y j ury. L a n c o n v . S tate , 253 S
. W
. 3d 699, 704 (Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 8 ). A n opi ni on a ddres si ng fac t ual s uf fi ci enc y m us ti ncl ude a di sc us si on of t he m os ti m port antand rel eva ntevi den ce t hats upport s t he app el l ant ’ s com pl ai nt o n a p p e a l
. S i m s v . S tate , 9 9 S .W .3 d 6 0 0 , 6 0 3 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 3 ). B. Law of

Part i es U n d e r t h e l a w o f p a rt i e s, “ [a] p e rso n is c ri m i n a l l y res p o n sibl e as a p a rty t o an offense i f t he offense i s com m i t t ed by hi s ow n cond uct , by t he cond uct of an ot her

for w hi ch he i s cr i m i nal l y res pons i bl e, or by bot h. ” Tex. Pen al Code A n n . § 7 .0 1 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ); F ran k v . S tate , 18 3 S. W
. 3d 63 , 72 (Tex. A pp. — Fort W ort h 20 05 , pet . ref’ d)
. A person i s “cri m i nal l y responsi bl e” for an o ffen se co m m i tted b y the co n d u c t of a n o th e r i f, a c ti n g w i th inte n t t o p rom o te or assi stt he com m i ssi on of t he offense, he sol i ci t s, encourages, di rect s, ai ds, or at t em pt s t o a i d t he ot he r p erson t o c om m i tt he of fens e. Tex
. Pen al Code A n n . § 7 .0 2 (a )(2 ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ); Frank , 183 S
. W
. 3d at7 2
. I n de t erm i ni ng w het her

a defendan tp art i ci pat ed i n an offense as a p arty, the fact fi nder m ay exa m i ne t he eve nt s occ ur r i ng be fore, dur i ng, an d a ft er t he com m i ss i on of t he of fens e a nd m ay rel y on act i ons of t he defend antt hatshow an unde rst and i ng14

a n d c o m m o n d e s i g n to c o m m i t th e o ffe n s e . R a n so m v . S tate , 9 2 0 S
. W
. 2d 2 8 8 , 3 0 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 4 ) (o p . o n re h ’g ). C
. Legal l y S uffi ci entEvi dence T h e ev i d e n c e p res e n ted i n th i s ca se sh o w e d tha t A p p e l l a n t w a s a p a rty t o t he Si d’ s Food St ore robbe ry by ac t i ng a s t he get aw ay dr i ver . Appel l ant adm i t t ed t o pol i ce thathe and hi s t hree fr i ends, K evi n, A l vi n, and M arcus, had di scussed robb i ng S i d' s Food S t ore and t hat , a few days l at er , he drove t hem i n hi s bl ue Bonnev i l l e t o t he st ore and w ai t ed as hi s fr i end s w enti ns i de t o rob t he st ore. Several eyew i t ne ss e s o b se r ved hi s bl ue B onn evi l l e i n t he st reet beh i nd t he st ore w i t h i t s occ upa nt s ac t i ng s us pi ci ous l y s hort l y be fore t he robb er y t ook pl ace. A ppel l antal so adm i t t ed t o pol i ce t hathe knew A l vi n had a g un w i t h hi m dur i ng t he robbe r y a nd e xpl ai ned t hat , w hen he he ard t he g u n s h o t, h e k n e w w h o h a d d o n e th e s h o o ti n g . C o m p a re W o o d e n v . S tate , 101 S
. W
. 3d 54 2, 54 6 (Tex . A p p .— F ortW ort h 2 00 3, pet . ref’ d) ( hol di ng t hat evi dence w as i nsuffi ci entt o prove o ne w ho faci l i t at ed get aw ay w as l i abl e as party t o a ggrava t ed robbe r y be ca us e t here w as no evi den ce t hathe kne w a gun w as used or

exhi bi t ed i n t he robb er y)
. A ft er

the robb er

y, A ppel l antw as seen w i t h a w ad of ca sh , and he exp l ai ned t he m one y t o hi s fr i end by w hi sp eri ng t hathe and hi s fr i ends had “hi ta l i ck. ”15

V i e w i n g th e e v i d e n c e i n th e l i g h t m o s t fa v o ra b l e to th e j u ry ’s v e rd i c t, w e hol d t hata rat i onal tr i er o f factco ul d have foun d t hatt he evi dence att r i al w as s u ffic ie n t to e s ta b l i s h th a t A p p e l l a n t c o m m i tte d a g g ra v a te d ro b b e ry . S ee J a c k so n , 4 4 3 U .S . a t 3 2 6 , 9 9 S . C t. a t 2 7 9 3 ; C l ayt on , 235 S. W
. 3d a t778. W e o v e rru l e A p p e l l a n t’ s fi rst po i n t. D
. Fact ual l y S uffi ci entEvi dence A n e u t ra l re v ie w o f t h e e v id e n c e a ls o re v e a ls t h a tt h e ju r y c o u ld rea so nab l y fi nd t hatA ppe l l antco m m i t t ed agg rava t ed robbe r y by ac t i ng a s t he g e ta w a y d ri v e r. S ee S t eadm an , 280 S. W
. 3d a t246; W at so n , 20 4 S
. W
. 3d at 41 4. I n addi t i on t o A ppel l ant ' s confessi on to pol i ce, i n w hi ch he descr i bed how he drove t o t he st ore, par ked behi nd i t , knew A l vi n car r i ed a gun, w at ched as A l vi n, K evi n, and M arcus gotoutand covere d th e i r faces w i t h band anas, w a i te d fo r th e m to re tu rn , h e a rd th e g u n s h o t, a n d d ro v e th e m to M a rc u s ’s hous e a ft er

t he robbe r

y, t he evi den ce att r i al al so de m ons t rat ed t hatA ppe l l ant had exp l ai ned t o hi s fr i end t hathe had robb ed th e s to re and i ncl udes several e y e w i tn e ss e s’ ac c o u n ts o f t h e rob b e ry. T h e se ac c o u n ts a re c o n sisten t w i th A p p e l l a n t’s c o n fe s s i o n . V i ew i ng t he evi den ce i n a ne ut ral l i ght , w e fi nd no obj ec t i ve bas i s for h o ld in g t h a tt h e ju r

y ’s v e rd ic t w a s c le a r ly w ro n g o r m a n ife s t ly u nju s to r t h a tit i sc o n tra d i c te d b y th e g re a t w e i g h t a n d p re p o n d e ra n c e o f th e e v i d e n c e . S ee16

La nco n , 2 5 3 S .W .3 d a t 7 0 4 ; W at so n , 2 0 4 S .W .3 d a t 4 1 4
– 1 5 , 4 1 7 . R a th e r, t he evi den ce pres ent ed att r i al w as s uf fi ci entt o s upport t he j ur y’ s verdi ct , an d no c ont rar

y e vi den ce ex i sts t hatw oul d rend er t he evi den ce fac t ual l y i ns uf fi ci ent u n d e r th e a p p l i c a b l e s ta n d a rd o f re v i e w . See L anc on , 253 S. W
. 3d a t704; W at so n , 20 4 S
. W
. 3d at 41 4– 15 , 41 7. A ccordi ngl y, w e hol d t hatt he evi dence i s fac t ual l y s uf

fi ci entt o s upportA ppe l l ant ’ s con vi ct i on for ag grava t ed robbe r

y. W e o v e rru l e A p p e l l a n t’s s e c o n d p o i n t.

V. E XTR AN E OUS A CT S E VIDENCE AT P UNI SHMEN T I n h i s th i rd p o i n t, A p p e l l a n t co n ten d s th a t th e t ri a l co u rtab u se d i ts di scret i on du r i ng t he pun i shm entphase o f t r i al by adm i t t i ng evi dence t hat A ppe l l antdi sp l aye d a fi rea r m atSi d’ s Fo od S t ore s om e m ont hs be fore t he ro b b e r y . S p e c ific a lly , A p p e lla n ta s s e rt s t h a th e d id n o tre c e iv e re a s o n a b le no t i c e o f

t he St a t e ’ s i nt e nt t o of fe r t hi s e vi de nc e a s re qu i re d by a rt i c l e 37. 07, se ct i on 3(g) of

t he code of

cr i m i nal proce dure and t hatt he t r i al co urterred by n o t c o n d u c ti n g a b a l a n c i n g te s t u n d e r ru l e o f e v i d e n c e 4 0 3
. Th e record show s t hato n Febr uary 2, 20 08 , A ppel l antrequest ed noti ce of t he St at e’ s i nt entt o of fer ex t rane ous of

fens es unde r

rul e o f ev i den ce 404( b) a nd c od e o f

c r i m i na l p roc e du re a rt i c l e 37. 07, s e c t i on 3(g)
. On O ct ober 9, 20 08 , t he S t at e provi ded no t i ce t o A ppel l antthati ti nt ended to of fer evi dence17

t ha t Ap p e l l a n t h a d d i s p l a y e d a h a n d g u n t o M u h a m m e d Aw d e a t Si d ’ s Foo d S t ore. Speci fi cal l y, t he noti ce st at es: That on or abo ut Feb ruar y 1, 200 7, t he def

end antpos se ss ed and di spl ayed a fi rear m , t o– w i t : a handgu n t o M oham m ad A w de at 68 09 M cC artA venue, Tar rantC oun ty, Tex as, a l ocat i on w hi ch sel l s al coho l i c beverages. D u r in g t h e p u n is h m e n t p h a s e , t h e p ro s e c u t o r a s k e d M u h a m m e d A w d e if h e re c a lle d w h e t h e r s o m e t h in g o u to f

t h e o rd in a r

y h a d o c c u r re d s o m e t im e before hi s brot her

A hm ad w as robb ed and shot. M uham m ed t est i fi ed t hatt hree t o s i x m ont hs before t he robbe r y, A ppe l l anthad com e i nt o t he st ore w i t h s om e of hi s fr i end s. Appel l antobj ec t ed t hatM uha m m ed’ s i nab i l i ty t o rem em ber t he p re c i s e d a t e o f

t h e e v e n tre n d e re d t h e St a t e ’ s n o t i c e re g a rd i n g t h e i n c i den t u n ti m e l y a n d th a t th e e v i d e n c e w a s i n a d m i s s i b l e u n d e r ru l e 4 0 3 . T h e tri a l c o u rt o v e rru l e d th e o bj e c ti o n s . M uham m ed t hen t est i fi ed t hatt he m en had com e i nt o t he st ore and, aft er p a y i n g for the ir p u rch a se s, o n e o f A p p e l l a n t’ s fri e n d s h a d j o k e d w i th M uha m m ed thathe s houl d j um p ov er t he cou nt er, be atup M uha m m ed, an d t ak e t he m one y from t he regi st er . As A ppe l l antfol l ow ed hi s fr i end s outt he door, M uha m m ed adv i se d hi m t hathe s houl d t el l hi s fr i end t hathe s houl d not j oke around l i ke t hatbe ca us e s om eon e m i ght fee l t hrea t ene d a nd t ak e a ct i on18

a g a in s th im . A p p e lla n tre s p o n d e d b y o p e n in g h is ja c k e t , p u llin g o u ta s m a ll b l a c k re v o l v e r, a n d s a y i n g , “ O h , d o n ’t w o rry . W e ’re p re p a re d
. I h a v e a g u n .”

A
. Not i ce w asReas ona bl e Under A rt i cl e 37. 07, Sect i on 3(g) A rt i cl e 37. 07, sec t i on 3(a) of t he cod e o f

cr i m i nal proce dure p rovi desfor t he i nt rodu ct i on of evi dence rel evantto sent enci ng, i ncl udi ng t he ci rcum st ances of t he of

fens e and evi den ce of ext rane ous bad ac t s, dur i ng t he p un i sh m ent p h a s e o f a tri a l . T e x . C o d e C ri m . P ro c . A n n . a rt. 3 7 .0 7 , § 3 (a ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 6 ). U p o n req u e st, th e S tate m u st p rov i d e th e d e fen d a n t rea so n a b l e n o ti c e o f i ts i n te n t to o ffe r e v i d e n c e o f e x tra n e o u s b a d a c ts . I d. art37
. 07 , § 3 (g)
. N ot i ce of i nt entt o offer

evi dence of ext raneou s act s t hatdi d not resul ti n a fi nal c o n v ic t i o n in a c o u rto f re c o rd o r

a p ro b a t e d o r

s u s p e n d e d s e n t e n c e is rea so nab l e o nl y i f i t i ncl ude s t he dat e o n w hi ch, t he cou nty i n w hi ch, an d t he v i c ti m to w h i c h th e e x tra n e o u s a c t o c c u rre d
. I d. W e h ave he l d t hata var i at i on of si x w eeks betw een t he dat e of t he offense gi ven i n t he noti ce and t hat p re s e n te d i n te s ti m o n y i s re a s o n a b l e . S e e B u rl i n g v . S tate , 83 S
. W
. 3d 199, 203 (Tex. A pp. — Fort W ort h 200 2, pet . ref’ d)
. O t her cou rt s hav e f ound per i ods ra n g i n g fro m th re e to e i g h t e e n m o n th s re a s o n a b l e . S e e H o h n v . S tate , 951 S
. W
. 2d 53 5 , 53 7 (Tex
. A pp. — Beau m ont 19 97 , no pet . ) ( hol di ng t hatt hreea n d -a -h a l f-m o n th s ’ n o ti ce sub stantia l l y c o m p l i e d w i th s ta tu te ); S p l a w n v . S tate ,19

94 9 S
. W
. 2d 86 7, 87 0– 71 ( Tex
. A pp. — D al l as 19 97 , n o p et . ) ( hol di ng t hat e i g h te e n m o n th s w a s re a s o n a b l e .) H ere, M uham m ed t est i fi ed t hatA ppel l ant had di spl ayed a gun t o hi m at S i d’ s Food S t ore “no m ore t han t hree t o si x m onths before” t he robb er y, w hi ch occur red on Ju l y 17 , 2 0 0 7 . Th e Stat e’ s not i ce al l eged t hatA ppel l anthad di sp l aye d a gun t o M uha m m ed “o n or ab outFe bruar

y 1, 2007
. ” Thus , t he S t a t e ’ s n ot i c e fa l l s w i t hi n t he t hre e - t o- s i x- m on t h ra ng e t o w hi c h M uham m ed t e s t ifie d a tt r ia l. Th e pur pose of

art i cl e 37
. 07 , sect i on 3(g) i s t o avoi d unfai r sur pr i se, t hat i s, t r i al by am b u s h
. N a n c e v . S tate , 9 4 6 S .W .2 d 4 9 0 , 4 9 3 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W ort h 1 9 97, pe t . ref’ d)
. Appel l antdoe s notcl ai m s ur pr i se or provi de any i ns i ghtast o how he w as su r pr i se d by M uha m m ed’ s t es t i m ony. Nor doe s t he rec o rd s h o w tha t A p p e l l a n t w a s a m b u s h e d . A p p e l l a n t did n o t re q u e st a con t i nua nce t o a l l ow hi m t o prepa re f or M uha m m ed’ s cros s exa m i nat i on, an d i n f ac t , A ppe l l ant con duc t ed a t horough cros s- exa m i nat i on. W e h ol d t hatt he St at e’ s not i ce i n t hi s ca se su bs t ant i al l y com pl i ed w i t h t he dat e requ i rem entof a rti c l e 3 7 .0 7 , se c ti o n 3 (g ). See Bur l i ng , 8 3 S .W .3 d a t 2 0 3 ; H ohn , 951 S. W
. 2d a t 5 3 7 ; S p l a wn , 949 S. W
. 2d a t871. A ppe l l antal so cl ai m s t he St at e’ s not i ce fai l ed t o spe ci f y a l oca t i on for

t he ext rane ous of

fens e. T he St at e’ s not i ce , how eve r , cl ea r l y s t at es t hatA ppe l l ant20

had di sp l aye d a ha ndgun t o M uha m m ed “ at6809 M cCartA ven ue, Tarrant C o u n ty, T e x a s.” T h i s p o rt i o n o f A p p e l l a n t’ s c o m p l a i n t, th e refo re, i s i n c o rre c t. B. Rul e 40 3 B al anci ng T est A ppe l l antal so cont end s t hatt he t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc ret i on by fai l i ng to c o n d u c t a ru l e 4 0 3 b a l a n c i n g te s t. A t r i al court ’ s rul i ng ad m i t t i ng extraneou s of fense evi dence i s revi ew ed fo r a n a b u s e o f d i s c re ti o n . S e e M i tch e l l v . S tate , 931 S. W
. 2d 950 , 953 (Tex. C r i m . A pp. 19 96 )
. The qu est i on for t he j ury w hen deci di ng pu ni shm enti s w hat s e n te n c e i t s h o u l d a s s e s s . E l l i so n v . S tate , 2 0 1 S
. W
. 3 d 7 1 4 , 7 1 8 ( T e x . C r i m. A p p . 2 0 0 6 ); H a l e y v . S tate , 1 7 3 S .W .3 d 5 1 0 , 5 1 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ). G ene ral l y, t he j ur

y i s ent i t l ed t o hav e bef ore i tal l pos si bl y rel eva nti nfor m at i on a b o u t th e i n d i v i d u a l d e fe n d a n t w h o s e fa te i t m u s t d e te rm i n e . C o o k s v . S tate , 8 4 4 S
. W
. 2 d 6 9 7 , 7 3 5 ( T ex . C r i m . A pp . 1 9 9 2 ), c e rt . deni ed , 509 U. S. 927 (1 9 9 3 ). A dm i ss i b i l i ty of

puni shm ent
- phase evi dence t hatt he t r i al courtdeem s re l e v a n t i s s ti l l s u bj e c t to a ru l e 4 0 3 a n a l y s i s . S e e R o g e rs v . S tate , 991 S. W
. 2d 263, 266– 67 (

Te x. Cr i m . App
. 1999 )
. Und e r Te xa s Ru l e o f

E vi de nc e 403, e v e n re le v a n te v id e n c e m a y b e e x c lu d e d if it s p ro b a t iv e v a lu e is s u b s t a n t ia lly o u tw e i g h e d b y t h e d a n g e r o f u n fa i r p re j u d i c e . S ee T e x . R . E v i d . 4 0 3 ; Rees e v . S tate , 3 3 S .W .3 d 2 3 8 , 2 4 0
– 4 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 ).21

A t r i al co urti s notrequ i red t o pe rfor m a rul e 403 bal anc i ng t es ti n a fo rm a l h e a ri n g o n the rec o rd o r ev e n an n o u n c e tha t i t ha s c o n d u c ted the tes t; o n c e the rul e i s i n v o k e d , th e tr i a l c o u rtis p res u m e d to h a v e p e rf o rm e d the tes t. W i l l i a m s v . S tate , 9 5 8 S .W .2 d 1 8 6 , 1 9 5
– 9 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ). I n t hi s case, A ppel l ant ’ s sol e rul e 40 3 co m pl ai nton appeal i s t hatt he t r i al c o u rt “d i d n o t c o n d u c t a b a l a n c i n g tes t a s i s re q u i red b y [r]ul e 4 0 3 .” B u t a si l entrecord does not s how t h a t th e tr i al courtdi d not perfor m t he requi red b a l a n c i n g te s t, a n d w e p re s u m e th a t i t d i d s o b e fo re ru l i n g o n A p p e l l a n t’s o bj e c ti o n . S e e R o

j a s v . S tate , 9 8 6 S .W .2 d 2 4 1 , 2 5 0 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 ); W illia m s , 9 5 8 S .W .2 d a t 1 9 5
– 9 6 ; M o y e r v. S tate , 948 S. W
. 2d 525, 531 (Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h 1 99 7, pet . ref’ d)
. Th e t r i al courtcoul d have proper l y deci ded t h a tt h e p ro b a t iv e v a lu e o f M u h a m m e d ’s t e s t im o n y w a s n o ts u b s t a n t ia lly ou tw ei gh ed by t he da ng er of un fai r prej ud i c e . S ee T e x . R . E v i d . 4 0 3 ; R eese , 3 3 S .W .3 d a t 2 4 0
– 4 1 . W e o v e rru l e A p p e l l a n t’s th i rd p o i n t.

V I. R E L E VA NC E OF V ICTIM ’ S P RESENT C ONDI TI ON I n h i s fo u rt h p o i n t, A p p e l l a n t co n ten d s th a t t h e tr i a l c o u rta b u se d i ts d i s c re ti o n b y o v e rru l i n g h i s ru l e 4 0 1 o bj e c ti o n t o A h m a d ’s d e m o n s tra ti o n b e fo re th e j u ry o f th e d e g re e o f m o v e m e n t h e h a d i n h i s l e g s . Evi dence i s rel evant i f i t has any t enden cy t o m ake t he exi st ence of a fact t hati s of

consequen ce t o t he det er m i nat i on of t he act i on m ore probab l e or l ess22

proba bl e t ha n i tw oul d be w i t houtt he evi den ce . Tex
. R. Evi d. 401. The th re s h o l d fo r re l e v a n c e i s l o w . Ex p art e M oreno , 245 S. W
. 3d 419, 425 n. 20 (Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2008 ) (ci t i ng Ten nard v. D ret ke , 542 U. S. 274, 285, 124 S. C t. 2 5 6 2 , 2 5 7 0 (2 0 0 4 )). A ppe l l ant w as cha rged w i t h agg rava t ed robbe r y. O ne of

t he el em ents of t he S t at e’ s proof w as t ha tA hm ad sust ai ned bo di l y i nj ury. Evi dence t hat A h m a d h a d d if

fic u lty u s in g h is le g s a ft e r t h e s h o o t in g m a d e it m o re p ro b a b le th a t h e h a d s u ffe re d b o d i l y i nj u ry . A ppe l l antargue s, t hough , t hatt he evi den ce w as notrel eva ntbe ca us e t he S t a t e h a d a lre a d y p ro v e n t h e n a t u re o f A h m e d ’ s inju r ie s . B u tre le v a n c y is a b s o l u te : i t i s e i th e r p re s e n to r i t i s n o t. S e e R a c h a l v . S tate , 917 S. W
. 2d 7 9 9 , 8 1 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 6 ); 1 S te v e n G o o d e , e t. a l ., Tex as Pract i ce: G ui de t o t he Tex as R ul es of Evi dence § 40 1. 3 ( 3d ed
. 2 00 2)
. T hus, w het her si m i l ar evi den ce w asad m i t t ed t o prove t he sa m e f ac t s doe s notfac t or i nt o a re l e v a n c y d e te rm i n a ti o n u n d e r ru l e 4 0 1 . S e e W o o d s v . S tate , 14 S
. W
. 3d 445, 4 5 3 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 0 , n o p e t.); se e also G i g l i o b i a n c o v . S tate , 210 S
. W
. 3d 63 7, 64 1– 42 ( Tex
. C r i m . A pp. 20 06 ) (consi der i ng l i kel i hoo d t hat evi den ce w i l l “ m erel y repe atevi den ce al rea dy adm i t t ed” i n a rul e 403 bal anc i ng t es t)
. A cc ordi ngl y, w e hol d t hatt he t r i al co urtac t ed w i t hi n i t s w i de di sc ret i on b y a d m i ttin g e v i d e n c e o f th e d e g re e t o w h i c h A h m a d c o u l d m o v e h i s le g s . S ee23

C a rra sc o v . S tate , 1 5 4 S .W .3 d 1 2 7 , 1 2 9 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ); M o n tg o m e ry , 8 1 0 S .W .2 d a t 3 9 0 . W e o v e rru l e A p p e l l a n t’s fo u rth p o i n t. V II. C ONC L USI ON H a v i n g o v e rru l e d A p p e l la n t ’s fo u r p o i n ts , w e a ffirm th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

SU E W A LKER J U S T I C E PA N EL: LI V I N G STO N , C. J. ; W A LKER and M EI ER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: M a y 13, 2010