BILL GUNTER APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO OF TARRANT COUNTY DWI

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.

BILL GUNTER APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY In four points that challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to convict him and the trial court's alleged failure to give a limiting instruction in the guilt-phase jury charge about an extraneous offense,1 appellant Bill Gunter appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI).1  We affirm.

NO. 02-09-00315-CR

Decided: October 22, 2010

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

OPINION

TERRIE LIVINGSTON

PANEL:  LIVINGSTON, C.J.;   DAUPHINOT and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED:  October 21, 2010

FOOTNOTES

FN1. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.04 (Vernon 2003).   To enhance appellant's punishment range, appellant's indictment alleged that he had three prior DWI convictions.   See id. § 49.09(b)(2) (Vernon Supp.2010)..  FN1. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.04 (Vernon 2003).   To enhance appellant's punishment range, appellant's indictment alleged that he had three prior DWI convictions.   See id. § 49.09(b)(2) (Vernon Supp.2010).

FN2. After the briefing and submission of this case, the court of criminal appeals held that there is “no meaningful distinction between the ․ legal-sufficiency standard and the ․ factual-sufficiency standard, and these two standards have become indistinguishable.”  Brooks v. State, PD-0210-09, 2010 WL 3894613, at *8 (Tex.Crim.App. Oct. 6, 2010).   Thus, the Jackson standard is the “only standard that a reviewing court should apply in determining whether the evidence is sufficient to support each element of a criminal offense that the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.   All other cases to the contrary ․ are overruled.”   Id. at *14.   Accordingly, we apply the Jackson standard of review to appellant's sufficiency complaints..  FN2. After the briefing and submission of this case, the court of criminal appeals held that there is “no meaningful distinction between the ․ legal-sufficiency standard and the ․ factual-sufficiency standard, and these two standards have become indistinguishable.”  Brooks v. State, PD-0210-09, 2010 WL 3894613, at *8 (Tex.Crim.App. Oct. 6, 2010).   Thus, the Jackson standard is the “only standard that a reviewing court should apply in determining whether the evidence is sufficient to support each element of a criminal offense that the State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.   All other cases to the contrary ․ are overruled.”   Id. at *14.   Accordingly, we apply the Jackson standard of review to appellant's sufficiency complaints.

FN3. The trial court's charge instructed the jury that to convict appellant, it had to find that he operated a motor vehicle while intoxicated in “Tarrant County, Texas.”.  FN3. The trial court's charge instructed the jury that to convict appellant, it had to find that he operated a motor vehicle while intoxicated in “Tarrant County, Texas.”

Copied to clipboard