In his third and fourth issues, Walker argues that the trial court erred in denying his Motion for Directed Verdict because the evidence was legally insufficient and because a fatal variance existed between the indictment and proof at trial rendering the evidence insufficient to support the conviction. We review a trial court's ruling on a motion for a directed verdict under the same standards used to review the legal sufficiency of the evidence.
Williams v. When reviewing a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we must determine whether, after viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v.
Virginia, U. We do not resolve any conflict of fact or assign credibility to the witnesses, as this was the function of the trier of fact. See Dewberry v.
- The Outcast;
- do it yourself texas divorce papers.
- public records search for the state of north carolina.
State, 4 S. In so doing, any inconsistencies in the evidence are resolved in favor of the verdict.
IntegraScan.com Coverage Policy
Curry v. State, 30 S. The sufficiency of the evidence is measured against the offense as defined by a hypothetically correct jury charge. See Malik v. Such a charge would include one that accurately sets out the law, is authorized by the indictment, does not unnecessarily increase the State's burden of proof or unnecessarily restrict the State's theories of liability, and adequately describes the particular offense for which the defendant is tried.
Further, when faced with a sufficiency of the evidence claim based upon a variance between the indictment and the proof, only a material variance will render the evidence insufficient. Gollihar v. State, 46 S. That is, a variance is fatal if it is material and prejudices the defendant s substantial rights.
Sprick, F. To make this determination, the court must consider whether the indictment 1 failed to inform the defendant of the charge against him sufficiently to allow him to prepare an adequate defense at trial, or 2 does not describe the offense clearly enough to protect the defendant from being subjected to the risk of later prosecution for the same crime. Specifically, he was charged with failing to notify the Ennis Police Department of a change of address.
Detective Sergeant David Anthony of the Ennis Police Department testified that he is responsible for registering all sex offenders within the city limits of Ennis. They are to report to him to verify registration annually and to notify him seven days before any change in address. When an individual notifies him of a change of address, Anthony contacts the law enforcement agency and notifies it that an offender will be moving into its jurisdiction.
According to Anthony s records, he last met with Walker on October 24, for his annual registration and Walker failed to register the following year. In , Anthony contacted the Tarrant County probation office and learned that Walker had moved to Oklahoma. Anthony had no records that indicated he had notified Oklahoma law enforcement that Walker was entering its jurisdiction. Officer David Daniel, a Tarrant County community supervision officer, testified that Walker notified him of his desire to move to Oklahoma and was granted permission to move, subject to the conditions of his probation.
Tarrant County issued a travel permit to Walker which indicated this stipulation. However, Walker failed to meet those conditions by failing to notify the Ennis Police Department seven days prior to changing his address. Walker testified that he understood that he was supposed to notify Anthony of his intent to move to Oklahoma. He met this requirement, he maintains, by meeting with Anthony at the Ennis Police Department on November 15, Walker s brother and wife testified that they went with him to the police department on that day and waited outside for him.
Walker stated that he brought the Tarrant County documents granting permission for him to move and Anthony reviewed these documents and worked on his computer during the meeting. Walker stated that he was under the impression that he had completed all necessary requirements to move to Oklahoma on November 23, Walker s Oklahoma probation officer, Russell Turner, testified that all of the necessary documents were provided by Texas in order for him to accept Walker onto his caseload.
He further testified that Walker registered as a sex offender in Oklahoma as required. In viewing all the evidence, we cannot say that a rational trier of fact could not have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt or that the jury was not rationally justified in finding guilt. Although there is substantial evidence that Walker attempted to meet the registration requirements, in viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict we find that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the finding that Walker failed to notify the Ennis Police Department of a change of address.
Walker objected to the reading of the portion of the indictment containing the name of the offense, aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court overruled the objection, and the State read the entire indictment to the jury. Walker also objected when the State asked Anthony and Daniel for which offense Walker was required to register, and the trial court overruled these objections.
Walker complains in his fifth and sixth issues that the trial court abused its discretion in overruling these objections. During the course of the trial, the State offered as Exhibit 4 the unadjudicated judgment on his plea of guilty, the order granting community supervision, the conditions of community supervision, and the supplement to conditions of community supervision for sexual offenders.
The State also sought to offer a copy of the indictment in the underlying case as part of Exhibit 4.
Speak with a Sex Crimes Defense Lawyer in Dallas Today
Walker objected only to the indictment. The trial court sustained that objection and the rest of the exhibit, which referenced the underlying offense, was admitted without objection. Further, Walker did not object to the jury charge which also referenced the offense.
Walker did not object to portions of Exhibit 4 that showed the underlying offense. These reports also include information on local, county and state jurisdictions, trial courts, courts of appeals, as well as county and state correctional facilities. Texas criminal records are stored online and are available to the public in the form of a Criminal Background Report.
Sources from which these records are obtained offer different levels of transparency, meaning that records that are public may become classified or redacted, and vice versa. As a result, the amount of criminal records information presented on StateRecords. Criminal records in Texas generally include the following subjects. An arrest record is a recording of an incident in which a suspected offender was taken into custody, fined, or questioned by a law enforcement agency. Crimes are sorted into three categories: felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions. An arrest is when a person is apprehended and deprived of their freedom by a law enforcement agency.
Police officers in Texas, in accordance with the Miranda Rights , are obligated to inform the target of an arrest that they are being arrested, share the reason for the arrest, notify the arrestee of their right to an attorney, and several other important pieces of information pertinent to the arrestee's rights. In Texas, a person can be arrested for an offense as minor as a misdemeanor breach of the peace, and be arrested on reasonable suspicion of committing a felony. A felony is a crime that is considered to be very serious. Felonies typically come with punishments , including jail or prison time, and heavy fines.
Felonies in Texas come in five categories—from most severe to least. They include capital felonies, first degree felonies, second-degree felonies, third-degree felonies, and state jail felonies. A capital felony is reserved for only the most serious crimes and repeat offenders.
- aol check error mail message network news occurred page search?
- marriages divorces birth records ottawa illinois.
- search people by cell phone for free?
- Welcome to ELLIS COUNTY.
- Dallas Sex Offender Registration Violation | Law Offices of Mark T. Lassiter.
They are punishable by life in prison with a possibility of parole if the offender is younger than 18 years. A person may get life in prison without parole if the offender is older than A capital felony may also result in a death penalty. First degree felonies are punishable by life in prison, or a prison term of fewer than 99 years but more than five years. Second-degree felonies are punishable by prison or jail sentences of up to 20 years, but more than two years. Third-degree felonies are punished with imprisonment of up to 10 years, but not less than two years. State jail felonies come with imprisonment of up to two years but not less than days.
- Sex Offender Registry!
- Important Caveats?
- Texas Criminal Records.
State jail felonies are sometimes upgraded to third-degree felonies depending on if a deadly weapon was used or if the individual on trial is a repeat offender. The board will not consider pardons if the crime involved treason or impeachment, when the inmate is undergoing deferred adjudication community supervision, when the inmate is undergoing early dismissal from community supervision in cases defined by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, when the inmate is accused of a Class C Misdemeanor which prohibits firearm possession, and other determinations.
Password is Nearing Expiration
Because of this, pardons in Texas are extremely rare. Probation records show when a person receives probation as an alternative to prison. It allows people convicted of a crime in Texas to serve their sentences out of custody, as long as they follow the rules specified at the beginning of their probation by the presiding judge and their probation officer. Probations are issued in proportion to the crime, meaning that the length and nature of the probation differ from case to case.
Texas Public Sex Offender Registry
Probation and supervision fall into five categories: pretrial supervision, felony conviction probation, misdemeanor conviction probation, felony deferred adjudication, and misdemeanor deferred adjudication. The main difference between felony and misdemeanor probations is that, if revoked, felons may face time in state prison, whereas misdemeanor offenders would serve time in county jails.
Texas State Records StateRecords. Texas Criminal Records First Name:.