James A. Bray, Jr. v. State

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-03-397 CR ____________________ JAMES ALLEN BRAY JR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 159th District Court Angelina County, Texas Trial Cause No. 23,220 MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted James Allen Bray, Jr., of murder and assessed a sentence of twenty years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, and a fine of $10,000. Bray appeals claiming the evidence is factually and legally insufficient to support his conviction. Specifically, Bray argues the evidence establishes he shot Byron Myers in self-defense. [W]hen a defendant challenges the factual sufficiency of the rejection of a defense, the reviewing court reviews all of the evidence in a neutral light and asks whether the State's evidence taken alone is too weak to support the finding and whether the proof of guilt, although adequate if taken alone, is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589, 595 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (citing Johnson v. State, 23 S.W.3d 1, 11 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000)). When a defendant challenges the legal sufficiency, we look not to whether the State presented evidence which refuted appellant's self-defense testimony, but rather we determine whether after viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact would have found the essential elements of murder beyond a reasonable doubt and also would have found against appellant on the self-defense issue beyond a reasonable doubt. Saxton v. State, 804 S.W.2d 910, 914 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (citing Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 2.03(d) (Vernon 2003); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); and Butler v. State, 769 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989)). See also Lynch v. State, 952 S.W.2d 594, 598 (Tex. App.--Beaumont 1997, no pet.). "The issue of self-defense is a fact issue to be determined by the jury, and a jury is free to accept or reject the defensive issue, even if the evidence is uncontroverted. A jury verdict of guilty is an implicit finding rejecting the defendant's self-defense theory." Hill v. State, 99 S.W.3d 248, 252-53 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2003, pet. ref'd) (citations omitted). The record reflects there was conflicting testimony as to whether or not Myers pointed a gun at Bray prior to Bray's opening fire. The testimony of Debra Thornton and Tonya Bogany contradicted Bray's version of events. The testimony of Dr. James R. Bruce regarding the wounds sustained by Myers was consistent with the description of events given by Thornton and Bogany. The determination of the credibility of the evidence was solely within the jury's province and the jury was free to accept or reject the defensive evidence. See Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 914. Under the applicable standards of review, we find the evidence was both legally and factually sufficient to support the guilty verdict and the jury's implicit rejection of Bray's claim of self-defense. Id. Issues one and two are overruled. The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. PER CURIAM Submitted on March 23, 2004 Opinion Delivered March 31, 2004 Do not publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Burgess, and Gaultney, JJ.