Case Name: Donnell Earl COY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1994-07-27
Citations: 879 S.W.2d 960
Docket Number: No. 10-93-062-CR
Parties: Donnell Earl COY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: Before THOMAS, C.J., and CUMMINGS and VANCE, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 879
Pages: 960–961

Head Matter:
Donnell Earl COY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 10-93-062-CR.
Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.
July 27, 1994.
Kerri K. Anderson-Donica, Corsicana, for appellant.
Patrick C. Batchelor, Crim. Dist. Atty., Jamie Bagnall, Asst. Crim. Dist. Atty., Corsi-cana, for appellee.
Before THOMAS, C.J., and CUMMINGS and VANCE, JJ.

Opinion:
OPINION
THOMAS, Chief Justice.
A jury convicted Donnell Coy of robbery and assessed punishment of sixty years' im prisonment. See TexPenal Code Ann. § 29.02 (Vernon 1989). In one point of error, he claims the evidence is insufficient to support a conclusion that he placed his victim in fear of imminent bodily injury. We will affirm.
The offense occurred in a Corsicana convenience store and was recorded on the store's surveillance camera. The jury viewed the videotape of the incident after it was introduced into evidence by the State. However, the videotape is not included in the record before this court. Neither is Coy's designation of the record on appeal before us. "[A] defendant who wishes to raise a sufficiency issue on appeal has the burden of ensuring that the entire record of the trial before the fact finder is before the appellate court...." O'Neal v. State, 826 S.W.2d 172, 173 (Tex.Crim.App.1992). Without the videotape, we are unable to determine the merits of Coy's insufficient-evidence argument. See id.; see also Hall v. State, 829 S.W.2d 407, 411 (Tex.App.—Waco 1992, no pet.). Therefore, we overrule his sole point of error and affirm the judgment of the court.