T EX
. P EN AL C OD E A NN
. § 1 9.03 (Ve rno n S up p. 20 08 ). 1 

### NUM BER 13-07- 061- CR



## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS C OR P U S C H R I S T I - E D I N B U R G
EL IZA BET H SM ITH , A pp ellan t,
v . TH E STA

TE OF T EXAS, A pp ellee.
On ap pe al f rom th e 1 30t h Dist rict C ou rt o f Matago rda Co un ty , T exas .



## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON Be fo re C hie f J us tice Vald ez an d Ju stice s Y añ ez an d Be na v ide s

M emo rand um Opin ion b y Ju stice Ya ñe z A jur y found El iz abeth Smit h g uil ty of capi tal murder

. O n appea l, El iz abeth arg ues 1 that the e v ide nce of her g uil t w as leg all y and factual ly i nsuffici ent. H av ing found su ff ic ien t
ev ide nce to c onv ic t El iz abeth of capi tal murder under the law of par ti es, w e aff ir m the tr ialT he f ol l owi ng i nf or m at i on i s dr awn f r om t r i al t est i m ony pr esent ed t hr ough t he St at e’ s wi t nesses. 2 2 cour t’ s j udg ment. I. T H E T RI A L E V I DE NCE 2 El izab e th w as marr ied to Jus ti n Smi th atthe ti me of the offense. The tw o l iv ed tog ether i n Ma tag orda Cou nty , as di d J ust in’ s p arents , Thomas and Toni Smi th. Ju sti n and El iz abeth did not hav e a g ood rela ti onshi p w it h Thomas and Toni. Ju sti n’s rela ti onshi p w it h his parents w as par

ti cul ar ly troubl ed. On Dec ember 9, 20 04, Thomas i nformed a frie nd, Ri chard H ahn, of a confrontat ion he had rec entl y had w it h J ust in. Thomas tol d H ahn t hat Jus ti n had sto len proper ty f ro m him and that he had gi v en Just in an ulti matum: Jus ti n had to retur n the st ole n proper ty by Mo nday , Dec ember 13, or els e Thomas w oul d i nform the author it ies of the t heft. Thi s u lt imat um w as hig hly disc oncer

ti ng to Jus ti n, w ho had ser v ed ti me i n pr is on and w as cur re ntl y on p arole

. In t he ev eni ng of Dec ember 11, Jus ti n and El li z abeth w ere dr iv ing around t ow n w it h Justin’s f rie n d a n d d ist antcousin, Craig Sabrsu la. Justin to ld Sab rsula tha t he was i n troub le w ith his pare nts fo r stealing their g uns, but th at he had a solution for his trouble s. Sabrsul a as ked Jus ti n to sta te the solu ti on. Acc ordin g to Sabrsul a, J ust in re mained q uie t, butEliz abe th respo nde d by “ laugh in g hysterically ” and sta ting, “Y ou’re no t going to like
w hat he has plan ned

. You’re not going to l ike w hat w e have to do[.]” Justin th e n told Sab rsula tha t he was g oing to kill his pare nts. Justin aske d Sab rsula for his assistan ce in commi tti ng the murde r, but Sabrsul a refused. In t he ev eni ng of Dec ember 12, Jus ti n and El iz a b e th dropped off thei r infant dau ght er, She lbie, atthe ho me of a f riend, Heath er Green . Prior to arri v ing at Green’s3

home, Jus t i n p h o n e d G re e n a n d n o t i fi e d h e r t h a th e a n d E l i z a b e t h w o u l d b e l e a v ing Shel bie w it h her

for t he ni g ht. Ju sti n tol d Green t hat “ he had busi ness to t ake care of w it h his dad[ .]” On Mond ay, D ecem ber 13 , Justin me t w ith Sab rsula af ter Sab rsula got out of

w ork. Ju st in wa s dri v ing a S ubur ban ow ned by hi s p arents

. Sabrsul a j oin ed J ust in in the Sub urba n , a nd Ju stin the n told Sabrsu la tha t he killed his pa rents, Th om as an d T oni. Justin to ld Sab rsula tha t, on the night of the m urde r, Eliz abe th drove him to his pa rents’ residen ce an d drop ped him of f . Ju s t in f urthe r told Sab rsula tha t he ha d a gun w ith him
w hen Eliz abe th left him a t his paren ts’ residence , and thathe use d the gun to mu rder his pare nts. Jus ti n drov e Sabrsul a to a s torag e bui ldi ng . Sabrsul a ass is ted Jus ti n in unl oadi ng it ems fro m the Subur ban and placi ng them int o a sto ra g e room. El iz abeth met J ust in and Sabrsul a at the s torag e bui ldi ng . The next day , J ust in drov e Sabrsul a i n the Subur ban t o T hom as an d T oni’s residen ce. Justin a nd Sa brsula en tered the trailer, w here Sabrsu la
s a w T h o m a s ’s a n d T o n i’ s d e a d b o d ie s wra p p e d in cl e a r p la s t ict a rp s . In t h e d a ys t o fo ll o w, Jus ti n w oul d c onti nue t o dr iv e Sabrsul a to the t ra iler. Ju stin w oul d ent er the trail er , but Sab rsula w ould not. On some of the se occasio ns, Sabrsula saw Eliz abe th en ter the trailer. On D ecem ber 20, T exas Ranger Davi d Maxw ell conta cted Justin an d Eliz abe th in respo nse to reporte d con cern regarding the w here abo uts of Th om as an d T oni. Maxw ell
con d u c t e d a n i n t e r

v i e w w i t h E l i z a b e t h t h a t d a y . W h e n a s k e d w h e r e Th o ma s a nd Toni
w er e, E li z abeth tol d M ax w ell that , t o her

kn owled ge, t h e y w ere on a three or four- w eek
v acat ion, during w hich time the y w ere l ookin g for raceho rses to pu rchase . Eliz abe th also told Maxw ell thatTh om as an d T oni did notlike her, and t hatJu stin’s life w as be tter w ith his4

parents out of tow n. W hen El iz abeth w as ask ed abou t t he l astti me she sa w Thomas a nd Toni, El iz abeth g av e Ma xw ell v ag ue answ ers. El iz abeth w as unabl e to tel l Ma xw ell w hen
s he l as t s aw Th om as an d Ton i , w he r e th ey mi g htb e, o r

w he n s he l as t ta l k ed t o th em . Ma xwe ll a ls o in t e rvi e we d Ju s t in la t e r t h a td a y. W hen El iz abeth w ent t o th e pol ic e depar tment to s peak w it h M ax w ell , G re en acc ompani ed her . Acc ordin g to Green, Eli z abeth appeared c alm before t he i nter v iew , but
a p p e a red ner

v ous afterw ards. G re en and El iz abeth w ere dr iv ing tog ether after the i nt er v i ew w he n El i z ab et h to l d Gree n th ats he h ad t o te l l h er s om et hi ng . E l i z ab et h be c am e em o ti onal and tol d Green t hat J ust in had k il led hi s p arents w hil e Green w as baby si tti ng Shel bie on th e n igh t o f D ecember

12. El iz abeth tol d Green t hat w hen J ust in cal led her about baby si tti ng Shel bie , and tol d her aboutneedi ng to tak e c are of s ome “ busi ness ,” Justin was r e f e rr in g to killing his paren ts. Eliz abe th f urthe r told Green thataf ter She lbie
w as left in G re e n’s ca re , s he drov e J ust in to hi s p arents ’ re si dence and left hi m there; Jus ti n l ater

ca ll ed Eli zab e th a n d tol d her thathe h ad s hot a nd k il led hi s p arents

. As El iz abeth w as re lat ing thes e ev ents to Green, El iz abeth q uic kl y ce ased bei ng emoti onal and s oon app eared c alm and nor mal to G re en. Green and El iz abeth then drov e to El iz abeth and Jus ti n’s re nted home, w hic h Green had recent ly

ag re ed to cl ean for money . Green beg an c lea nin g the home and finis hed w it h the w or k l ater

thatday

. After Green c lea ned t he home and w as prepar ing to lea v e, G re en o b s e rve d E li za b e t h p la c e a d u f fe l b a g c o n t a in in g a la rg e a m o u n to f je we lryi n t o a b o x. El iz abeth ask ed Green w hat s he had done w it h g un s hel l cas ing s t hat h ad been on a n end tabl e i n the l iv ing ro om. Green tol d El iz abeth that she had pla ced the shel l cas ing s i n the master bedroom w hil e c lea nin g . El iz abeth then re tr iev ed th e s hel l cas ing s from theT EX
. P EN AL C OD E A NN
. § 7

. 01 (a) ( V ern on 20 03 ). 3 5 bedroom and ask ed Green w here the cas ing s coul d be hid den. At some poi nt, El iz abeth place d the b ox con tainin g the d uf fel bag in Green ’s vehicle; Eliz abe th asked Green to hold onto the b ox

unti l the fol low ing da y, a t whic h time El iz abeth and J ust in w oul d c ome to
re t ri e ve it

. Gr e e n d id n o tse e wh a tE li za b e t h d id wit h t h e sh e ll ca s in gs . T h e fo ll o win g d a y, o n December

21, law enforc ement for ced thei r w ay i nto Thomas and Toni’ s resi dence , r es ul ti ng i n th e di s c ov er y o f t he i r b od i es . Gree n be c am e aw are of th i s di s c ov er y t he s am e day. Green the n op ene d the box that El iza b eth had g iv en h er and discovered the shell casings inside. T he shell casings would later be tied to th e mu rders of Th om as an d T oni. Justin and E liz abe th f led Matagorda Co unt y a roun d the t ime T hom as’s and To ni’s bodi es w er e di sc ov ered. A w ar ra nt w as is sued for J ust in’ s a rre st

. O n J anuar y 8, 2004, Jus ti n and El iz abeth w ere a p p rehended i n R uid oso, N ew M ex ic o. Author it ies had been pr epar ing an ar re st w ar ra nt for Eli z abeth pr ior

to her apprehens ion

. Onc e apprehended, El iz abeth g av e a s tatementto pol ic e impl ic ati ng Jus ti n in his parents ’ murde r. El iz abeth deni ed k now ing of Jus ti n’s i ntentto murde r Thomas and Toni, and her st atement appeared to di sput e the co ntent ion thatsh e had dropped J ust in off at his parents ’ re si dence the n ig ht of their mu rder. II. A PPLI C A B LE L AW “A person is cr imina lly respon sible as a pa rty to an o f

fense if t h e o f f e n s e is
com mitt ed b y

his ow n con duct , by the cond uct of ano the r fo r w hich he is cr imina lly
re spons ibl e, or

by both .” A person is cr imi nal ly respo nsi ble for

an off ense commi tted by 3 the c onduc t of anot her i f, “ a ct ing w it h i ntentto promote or as si st the c ommis si on of theId

. § 7

. 02 (a)(2) ( V ern on 20 03 ). 4 B a rn e s v . S ta te , 62 S

. W

. 3d 28 8, 29 5-9 7 (T ex . A pp . –A us t i n 2 00 1, pe t

. ref’ d) (ci t ati on s om i t t ed ). 5 6 off ense, he s oli ci ts, enc ourag es, di re cts , ai ds, or att empts to ai d the other person to commi t t he offense.” 4

Unde r the law of partie s, the Sta te i s able to enlarge a d e f e nda nt’s criminal respo nsibility to act s in w hich he may not b e t h e primary acto r. W hen an acc used promotes or ass is ts in the commi ss ion of an off ense, he also sha res the crimin al respon sibility . If the St ate is to prov e the accuse d’s guilt as a party, it mustf irst prov e the g uilt of ano the r person as th e prima ry acto r. In o rd e r t o e s tab lish liability as a party, it must be shown that, in addi ti on to the il leg al cond uctbythe pr imar y ac tor , t he ac cus ed har bored th e spec ifici ntentto promote or as si st the c ommis si on of the off ense. The acc used must know

thathe w as ass is ti ng i n the offense’ s commi ss ion

. The ag re ement, if any , mus t be before o r cont emporaneous w it h the cr imi nal ev ent. The ev ide nce must show thata t the time of the c ommis si on of the off ense, the par

ti es w er e ac ti n g t o g ether , eac h doi ng so me par t of the ex ecut ion of the c ommon des ig n. W h ile an agre e m e n t o f th e p a rt ie s t o ac t t o get h e r in a co m m o n de sign sel dom ca n be prov ed by di re ct ev ide nce, reli ance maybe h ad on the act ion s o f the part ies , show ing byeither director circums tanti al ev ide nce, an understa ndi ng and common de si g n to do a cer tai n ac t. T he St ate mustshow m o re t han mere presen ce to est ablish par ti ci pati on i n a c ri minal offense. M ere presenc e or ev en know led g e of an of fense doe s not m ake o ne a party to th e of fense . Neverthe less, me re pr esenc e i s a ci rc umstan ce tendi ng to prov e that a person is a par ty to the off ense, and w hen t aken w it h oth er facts, may be suffici ent to show that he w a s a p a r

t i c i p a n t

. I n d e t e r mi n i n g w h e t h e r a n a c c u s e d p a rt i c i p a t e d i n the off ense as a par

ty , t he fact finder

may ex amine the ev ents occ ur ri ng before, dur ing , and after

the commi ss ion of the o ff ense. 5

III . L EGA L S UF FI CI E NCY In ad dress ing a l eg al suffici ency ch all eng e, w e rev iew

al l the e v ide nce in the l ig ht most fav ora b le to the v erdict and as sume t hat t he tr ier of fact resol v ed c onfli cts i n the tes ti mony , w eig hed the ev ide nce, and drew re asona ble inferences in a m a n n e r thatS e e R o ll e rs o n v . S ta te , 22 7 S

. W

. 3d 71 8, 72 4 (T ex . C ri m . A pp . 20 07 ). 6 H o o p e r v . S ta te , 21 4 S

. W

. 3d 9, 13 (T ex . C ri m . A pp . 20 07 ). 7 S e e C o n n e r v . S ta te , 67 S

. W

. 3d 19 2, 19 7 (T ex . C ri m . A pp . 20 01 ). 8 7 supp orts the v erdict. It is notn ecessa ry t hatev eryfact po int directly and indep end ent ly 6 to t he defendant' s g uil t, but i t i s e noug h i f the c oncl usi on i s w ar ra nted by the combi ned and cumul ati v e f o rce of al l the i ncr imi nati ng ci rc umstan ces . W e mustco nsi der al l the 7 evidence, rig htly or w rongly adm itted , tha t the trier of fact w as pe rmitte d to con sider. 8 In t he ins tant cas e, the jur y ch arg e per mitt ed th e j ur y to ass ess El iz abeth’ s g uil t as follows: Now

i f y ou find from the ev ide nce bey ond a re asona ble doubtthaton or abo ut th e 13 th da y

of Dece m ber, 20 04, in Matagorda Cou nty, Texas, JU STIN SM ITH did i n tenti onal ly or kn ow ing ly

ca use the d eath of an indi vid u a l, THOMAS SMITH, b y shoo ting him w ith a f irearm an d T ONI SM ITH by

sh ooti ng her w it h a firear m or st abbi ng her

w it h a k nife, a nd th at t h e d e fe n d a n tE L I Z A B E T H S MI T H, t h e n a n d t h e re k n e w o f t h e in t e n t , if

a n y, of sai d J US TIN SM ITH to s hoot and k il l the s aid T HO MA S SM ITH and t o shootor st ab and k ill the sa id TONI SM ITH and t he defendant act ed w it h i nt en t to p rom ot e or

a s s i s t th e c om mi s s i on of th e offen s e by J U STI N S M IT H to s hot [ si c] or

st ab and ki ll the sai d THO MA S SM ITH and TON I SM ITH by enco uraging, directing, aiding or att em pting to aid JUST IN SMITH to comm it the o ff ense of c ausi ng the death of TH OM AS S MI TH and TON I SM ITH, y ou w il l fi n d t he defendant, ELI ZAB ETH S MI TH, g uil ty of capi tal murder

as charg ed i n the i ndi ctment

. On ap peal , Eli z abeth does not chal len g e the suffici ency of the e v ide nce est abl is hin g that Jus ti n c aused the deaths of his parents as st ated in the j ur y ch arg e. The onl y

q uest ion El iz abeth poses to thi s C our t i s w hether

there w as suffici ent e v ide nce that she act ed w it h the inten t to prom ote or assist Justin in mu rdering his parent s. Base d on the t est imony of Sabrsul a and Green, the j ur y heard ev ide nce that El iz abeth had dropped o ff Ju sti n at his parents ’ re si dence on D ecembe r 1 2 , the n ig ht ofS e e g e n e ra ll y C l a y to n v . S ta te , 2 3 5 S .W .3 d 7 7 2 , 7 7 9 ( T e x . C rim . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ) (r e c o g n i zi n g th a t p rin ts 9 c an provi de an ad di t i on al , i nc rem en t al pi ec e o f ci rcu m s t an t i al evi de nc e o f on e’ s gu i l t ). 8 thei r murde r. The t ri al ev ide nce per mitt ed th e j ur y to conc lud e tha t J ust in w as at t he
re si dence for a prolo ng ed per iod of ti me. By not hav ing hi s F ord Ex plo re r par ked outs ide his parents ’ re si dence , J ust in w as abl e to si g nific antl y reduce the chanc e tha t a nei g hbor
or passer by

w oul d connecthis pre senc e to the sce ne of the cr ime on the nig ht in q uest ion

. F ur th er mo r e, a s a res ul t of E l i z ab et h drop pi ng h i m o ff, J us ti n w as ab l e to l ea v e th e c r i me scene in his parent s’ Subu rban —w hich th e trial ev iden ce indicat ed w as the v ehicle Ju stin pr eferred to dr iv e—w it hout leav ing behind ev ide nce of his prese nce (i .e., hi s E x plo re r)

. It is thus clear tha t Eliz a b e th’s act of driv ing and leaving Justin a t his paren ts’ residence assisted his comm itme nt of the cha rg ed o f

fense . Th e on ly

rema ining matt er lef

t to ad dress is w hether

El iz abeth had t he intent to as sis t J u st in in hi s cr im in a l u n d e rt a kin g. Sabrsul a tes ti fied th at J ust in di sc uss ed hi s p lan to murde r his parents i n frontof Eliz abe th, who exhibited ne ither surprise no r disappro v al during this discussion . Sabrsula
a n d Gre e n bo th reve a le d s ta te m e n ts E liza b e th m a d e t h a t s u gges te d sh e ha d kn o wled ge of Just in’ s i ntentto murde r his parents

. Hah n’s tes ti mony es tabl is hed t hat ( 1) Ju sti n w as on bad ter ms w it h his parents dur ing the day s precedi ng the murders, and ( 2) Ju sti n w as aw are of hi s p arents ’ int ent t o repor t hi s thefts to t he aut hor it ies on D ecember 13. Sabrsul a’s tes ti mony

rev eal ed th at E li z abeth w as aw are of thi s c onfli ct betw een J ust in and his paren ts. Inside the pa rents’ reside nce, law enforcem entunco v ered Eliz abe th’s f ingerprint on a cellopha ne wrapp er, w hich w as pa ckaging ma terial for the type of plastic tarp foun d covering T hom as’s and To ni’s bod ies. 9 El iz abeth’ s b ehav ior

after the murde rs created an inference that she ass is ted i n theS e e g e n e ra ll y G u e v a ra v . S ta te , 152 S. W

. 3d 45, 50 ( T ex. C r i m . App. 200 4) ( f i ndi ng t hat i nconsi st ent 10 st at em ent s and f al se st at em ent s t o au t hor i t i es ar e pr obat i v e of wr ongf ul cond uct and ar e al so ci r cum st ant i al evi de nc e o f gu i l t ).

See ge ner

al l y i d. ( f i ndi ng t hat one ’ s at t em pt t o con ceal i ncr i m i nat i ng e v i dence i s pr obat i v e of 11 w ron gfu l co nd uc t an d i s al s o c i rcu m s t an t i al of gu i l t ).

See ge ner

al l y C l ayt on , 235 S

. W

. 3d at 780 (r ecogni z i ng t hat t he f i nderoffa ct m ay dr aw an i nf er ence 12 of g ui l t fr om t he ci rcu m s t an c e o f f l i gh t ).

W a ts o n v . S ta te , 2 0 4 S .W .3 d 4 0 4 , 4 1 4 -1 5 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ); D ric h a s v . S ta te , 175 S. W

. 3d 13 7 9 5 , 7 9 9 (T e x . C rim . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ). 9 com mission of

the of fense . Th is beha v ior consisted of the followi ng: ( 1) w earing To ni’s jew elry imm edia tely af

ter the murd ers; (2) telling v ary ing stories reg arding h ow the jew elry came i nto h er

pos ses si on; ( 3) tel lin g c o n f licti ng st or ies reg ardin g the w hereabouts of Thomas and Toni; (4 ) enter ing Thomas a nd Toni ’s reside n ce, w hic h, as tes ti fied to by S a b rs u la a n d Ma xwe ll , c o n t a in e d T h o m a s ’s a n d T o n i’ s re a d il y vis ib le b o d ie s u p o n e n t ry; (5 ) s e ll in g o r a t t e m p t in g t o se ll je we l ryb e l o n g in g t o T h o m a s a n d T o n i a tva ri o u s p a wn shop s; (6) ly ing to law

enforcem entduring an interview w ith Maxw ell; (7) hiding evi den ce 10 relate d to th e mu rders; (8) leaving town in T hom as an d T oni’s Sub urba n at th e time their 11 bodi es w ere di sc ov er ed; ( 9) ev adi ng the detec ti on of autho ri ti es; and (1 0) sh ow ing utt er 12 ind ifferenc e to Thomas’ s a nd Toni ’s murders w hen app re hended by l aw enforc ement. Vi ew ing the ev ide nce in the l ig ht most fav orabl e to the jur y ’s ve rd ic t, w e c oncl ude that a rati onal tr ier

of fact c oul d hav e fou n d b e yon d a reason abl e doubtal l the e ss enti al ele ments of capi tal m urder and El iz abeth’ s g uil t as a pa rty to the o ff ense. El iz abeth’ s l eg al suffici ency

ch all eng e i s o v er ru led

.

IV. F A CTUA L S UF FI CI E NCY W h e n re vie win g t h e fa c t u a l s u f f ic ie n c y o f

t h e e vid e n c e t o s u p p o rta co n vic t io n , we re v iew al l the e v ide nce in a neutral li g ht, fav or ing nei ther par ty

. W e then ask (1 ) w hether 13W at son , 2 0 4 S .W .3 d a t 4 1 4 -1 5 , 4 1 7 ; J o h n s o n v . S ta te , 23 S

. W

. 3d 1, 11 (T ex . C ri m . A pp . 20 00 ). 14 W at son , 204 S. W

. 3d a t 417

. 15I d. 16 John son , 2 3 S .W .3 d a t 9 ; C a in v . S ta te , 95 8 S

. W

. 2d 40 4, 40 7 (T ex . C ri m . A pp . 19 97 ). 17 10 the e v ide nce suppo rt ing the conv ic ti on, a lt houg h l eg all y suffici ent, is nev erthel ess so w eak that the j ur

y ’s v erdict seems cl ear ly w ro ng or manifest ly unj ust , or

( 2) w hether , c onsi der ing confli cti ng ev ide nce, the jur y ’s v erdic t i s a g ain st the g re at w eig ht and preponderance of the
e vide n ce . An ap p e lla te co u rtju d ge c a n n o t c o n clu d e th a t a co n vict io n is “c le a rly w ro n g”

14 or “m a n if e s tly

unjust ” simplybeca use, on the q uan tum of ev iden ce ad mitt ed, she w ould hav e v oted to ac q uithad she been on the jur y . Nor can an a ppel lat e c our

t dec lare tha t 15
a con f lict in the evidence justif ies a new tri al simply becau se it disagrees w ith the jury ’s resolut ion of

thatconf lict. Nev erthe less, tho ugh due def eren ce mu st be g iv en to the fact

16 fi n d e r' s d eter minat ion s— par ti cul ar ly thos e c oncer nin g the w eig ht an d c re dib il ity of the evidence—t he review ing court may disagree w ith the result in orde r to prevent a ma nifest inj ust ic e. 17 In t he i nst ant c ase, there i s no conflic ti ng ev ide nce in the rec ord that w oul d l ead us to c onc lu d e t h a t the j ur y ’s v erdict i s a g ain st the g re at w eig ht an d preponderance of the
ev ide nce. The on ly

ev ide nce admit ted dur ing El iz abeth’ s cas e- in- chi ef w as Thomas’ s a nd T oni’s w ills. Mo re o v er, the ev iden ce is not so weak thatthe jury’ s v erdict see ms clea rly
wron g or m a n ife st ly un ju st . On ap p e a l, Eli zab e th pro f fe rs a lt e rn a ti ve p e rsp e ct ives th ro u gh
w hic h to v iew

much of the ev ide nce ag ain st her ; t hese pe rsp e ctiv es seek to por tray Eliz abe th as a n aive girl t hatwould be blind to Justin’s criminal acts. T he jury , howev er, cl ear ly rej ect ed s uch a por

tray al, and w e g iv e due deferenc e to the j ur y ’s as ses sments and11

deter minat ion s o f the ev ide nce. After a ne utral re view of all the ev ide nce, both for a nd ag ain st the jur

y ’s f ind ing of

gui lt , w e f ind that the proof of Eli z abeth’ s g uil t as a pa rty to the off ense is not so obv iou sl y w eak as to un der mine confide nce in the j ur y ’s v erdict, nor

i s t he proo f of her guilt as a party, a lthou gh a dequa te take n alon e, greatly out w eighed b y contrary proof. El iz abeth’ s fact ual su ff ic ien cy ch all eng e i s o v er ru led

. V. C ONCL US I ON W e aff ir m the tr ial co urt’ s j udg ment.

LINDA REYNA Y AÑEZ, J u s t i c e

Do not p ubl is h. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47 .2(b). Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and filed thi s t he 26t h day

of Ma rc h, 20 09.