Albino Rosendo Soto v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 106th District Court of Garza County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-06-0247-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B JANUARY 17, 2007 ______________________________ ALBINO ROSENDO SOTO, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ FROM THE 106TH DISTRICT COURT OF GARZA COUNTY; NO. 05-2280; HON. CARTER T. SCHILDKNECHT, PRESIDING _______________________________ Memorandum Opinion _______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Albino Rosendo Soto (appellant) appeals his conviction for assault-family violence. Via two issues, he contends that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm. Background On February 22, 2005, appellant was living with Belinda Clifton, his girlfriend. They had been arguing most of the day and after serving him dinner the arguing became violent. He threw his plate at her and then hit her. She began screaming, at which point appellant began choking [her]. The victim further testified that after appellant struck her . . . in the head, [she] . . . couldn t focus . . . [or] see since all was black. So too did she see like starbursts in front of [her] eyes . . . [a]nd . . . told [appellant that she] couldn t see. Appellant also grabbed her head and slamm[ed] . . . it . . . back and forth. Pictures were later introduced into evidence memorializing the bruises on the victim caused from the assault. On cross, defense counsel pointed out inconsistencies between the statement Belinda gave the police and her testimony at trial. She further admitted to being on drugs for seven days prior to the assault and seeing people allegedly looking in the window. Issues One and Two - Sufficiency of the Evidence The applicable standards of review appear in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) and Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We refer the parties to those cases. Appearing of record is the testimony of Belinda not only identifying appellant as her boyfriend and the one who assaulted her but also describing the manner in which the assault occurred and its effects. It constituted some evidence upon which a rational trier of fact could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that appellant intentionally and knowingly caused bodily injury to Belinda by hitting and choking her. TEX . PEN . CODE ANN . ยง22.01 (Vernon Supp. 2006) (defining the offense of assault). As for appellant s attempt to discredit the victim by showing that she had been on drugs and illustrating inconsistencies between her testimony and statement, this 2 information was far from overwhelmingly unfavorable to the jury s verdict. Nor was the evidence of appellant s guilt weak; rather, ample existed if the jurors opted to believe it. And, it was for the jurors, as opposed to this court, to resolve doubts in testimony and select who to believe. Margraves v. State, 34 S.W.3d 912, 919 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (stating that the jurors have the obligation to resolve credibility disputes). Thus, we hold that the verdict has the support of both legally and factually sufficient evidence and overrule the issues. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
