![]() Applicable Law The Court of Criminal Appeals has expressed our standard of review of a sufficiency issue as follows: When addressing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we consider whether, after viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE In his first issue, appellant contends that the evidence supporting his conviction is insufficient because no rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly possessed methamphetamine, as alleged in the indictment. ![]() 16-03800-CRF-272 MEMORANDUM OPINION In two issues, appellant, Roy Castaneda Rodriguez, challenges his conviction for unlawful possession of a controlled substance in an amount greater than four grams, but less than 200 grams, with intent to deliver. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee From the 272nd District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 10-18-00179-CR ROY CASTANEDA RODRIGUEZ, Appellant v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |