Graber
l5 OpinionissuedOctober15,2015
In The
@ourtof 9ppeuld For The
frirst Dtgtrictof0trexsd
NO.01-14-00942-CR
ALBERT JUNIOR FEBUS,Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS,Appellee
On Appeal from the 176th District Court Harris CountyoTexas Trial Court CaseNo. 1406874
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convictedappellantAlbert JuniorFebusof the third-degree felonyof
Pnoc. arts.62.055(a), failingto registeras a sex offender.SeeTsx. Copp Cntn,t.
andhe Febuspleadedtrueto two prior unrelatedfelonyconvictions, 62.102(a)-(b).
T'hejury assessed was thus subjectto an enhancedsentence. punishmentat 35 yearsin prison,andFebusappealed. In his soleissue,he challenges the sufficiency
of the evidenceto supportthe conviction.
We find sufficientevidenceto supportthe conviction,and we affirm.
Background
Febus is requiredto registeras a sex offender due to a past conviction for
indecencywith a child. He was required to sign and initial forms indicating his
understandingof the registrationrules both on his releasefrom prison and on every
occasionwhen he reregistered.Febus complied with the registrationprogram for
six yearswithout any issues.
In March 2013, Febusmoved liom the apartmentwhere he was residing at
6110 GlenmontDrive, Apt.57, to anotherapartmentwithin the same complex,
6100 Glenmont Drive, Apt. 45. He was not listed on the leasesfor either
aparlment,and the propefty managertestified that she did not know him and had
not seen him on the apartmentgrounds. The tenant who was listed on the new
apartment'sleasetestifiedthat Febuslived with him for eight monthsand shareda
portion of the rent. BecauseFebus changedaddresses,he was requiredto update
his addressfor the sex-offenderresistration.
Febusobtaineda new driver's licensefrom the Texas Departmentof Public
Safety in orderto registerfor a new CR-14 identification,also known as a "blue
card." He also filled out a CR-39 registration("Sex Offender Update Form"). All three of the registrationdocumentsin question (the temporary license,the blue
card, and the Sex OffenderUpdate Form) listed his new addressas 6110 Glenmont
Drive, Apt. 45, insteadof the correctaddress,6100 GlenmontDrive.
The registrationofficer who assistedFebus testified that reregistrationfor
sex offenders involves a face-to-face meeting in which officers sit with the
registrantsand assistthem with the process.The officer statedthat Febusprovided
her with the incorrectaddresswhen she typed out the registrationforms. Febus,in
contrast,testified that he gave the correct addresswhen registeringbut that there
was some form of clerical error that led to the incorrectversion appearingon the
documents.Febussignedall threedocumentswithout correctingthe address.
Sevenmonths later, a complianceofficer visited 6110 GlenmontDrive to
attemptto locateFebusand ensurethat he was living where he was registered.The
officer spoke with the property manager and the resident of the apartment
identified on Febus's registration.Aller deterrniningthat Febus was not living at
the address.the officer obtaineda warrant for his arrest.The officer did not visit
6100 GlenmontDrive.
Febus was chargedwith intenlionally and knowingly failing to provide his
new addressto the local law enforcenrentauthority.The jury found Febusguilty of
failure to register.At the punishmentstage,Febuspleadedtrue to past convictions
for robbery and for being a felon in possessionof a firearm, leading to that set the minimunr punishrnentat 25 years. The State also enhancements
evidencethat Febuspreviouslyhad beenconvictedof a state-jailfelony presented
and that he had changedhis namerepeatedlyover the past 20 years.The jury
at 35 years. punishment assessed
Febusappealed.
Analysis
In his sole issueon appeal,Febusarguesthat the evidencewas insufficient
to supporthis conviction.
We determine whether the evidence was sufficient to support a criminal
convictionby a legal sufhciencystandard.Brooks v. State,323 S.W.3d 893, 895