JACKIE RAY JACKSON,FROM A DISTRICT COURT APPELLANT, v. OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT DALLAS
NO. 05-88-00556-CR
JACKIE RAY JACKSON,FROM A DISTRICT COURT
 
        APPELLANT,
 
v. OF
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
 
        APPELLEE. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
 
 
 
BEFORE JUSTICES MCCLUNG, STEWART AND BAKER
OPINION PER CURIAM
MAY 18, 1989
        Jackie Ray Jackson was convicted in a jury trial of the offense of aggravated robbery. Punishment, enhanced by two prior convictions, was assessed at sixty-five years' confinement. Appellant claims that the evidence is insufficient to show that he had the intent to obtain and maintain control of property. We overrule his point and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
        Willie Watson, the complainant, testified that on January 10, 1988, appellant approached him at a store and asked him for money. When he did not give appellant money, appellant told him that he (appellant) had a knife. Appellant also showed him the knife. The complainant went to a security guard, who spoke with appellant. Appellant left shortly thereafter. Approximately two hours later, appellant attacked the complainant, stabbed him, and took $25 from his pocket. Mr. Watson said that he stayed in the hospital six days as a result of the stab wound. He also said that appellant placed him in fear of imminent bodily injury when he robbed him.
        David Smith, a police officer with the Dallas Police Department, testified that while he was on duty on January 10, 1988, the complainant approached him and told him that he had been stabbed and robbed. After receiving a description of the assailant, he transmitted the description via radio. Less than a minute after broadcasting the description, he received a report that a suspect had been detained. He proceeded to the location where the suspect was being held. He identified appellant as the person who was detained by police. His description matched that given by the complainant.
        Phyllis Nobles, a police officer with the City of Dallas, also testified concerning appellant's arrest. She said that when she received the broadcast description of the person who had robbed the complainant, she recognized that the description matched that of a person she had just passed while on patrol. She approached the individual, who had a knife in his hand. He did not drop the knife until Officer Nobles and another officer had drawn their guns. She identified appellant as the individual she arrested. She further said that at the time he was arrested, appellant gave a false name.
        In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court's inquiry is limited to determining whether, evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, any rational trier of fact could have found all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Houston v. State, 663 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). Questions concerning the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony are to be resolved by the trier of fact. Bonham v. State, 680 S.W.2d 815, 819 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 865 (1985).
        The elements of the offense of aggravated robbery, as applied to the present case, are satisfied when the State shows that (1) a person (2) in the course of committing theft (3) with intent to obtain or maintain control of property (4) intentionally or knowingly (5) threatens or places another in fear of (6) imminent bodily injury or death and (7) uses or exhibits (8) a deadly weapon. Bilbrey v. State, 594 S.W.2d 754, 759 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980); Sanchez v. State, 722 S.W.2d 781, 785 (Tex. App.-- Dallas 1986, pet. ref'd). Appellant claims only that the second and third elements of the offense were not proven. The intent to deprive of property must be determined from the words and acts of the accused. Griffin v. State, 614 S.W.2d 155, 159 (Tex. Crim. App. [panel op.] 1981).
        The record reflects that prior to the stabbing, appellant approached the complainant and asked for money, exhibiting a knife. The complainant refused to give appellant any money, and asked a security guard to assist in convincing appellant to leave him alone. Appellant later attacked the complainant and stabbed him; as he did so, he took money from the complainant's pocket. Appellant took control of the money through force and violence by putting the complainant in fear of serious bodily injury or death. See Jenke v. State, 487 S.W.2d 347, 348 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972). Accordingly, we find that the evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant had the intent to deprive of property, and that the actions took place in the course of committing theft. Appellant's point of error is overruled.
        The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
                                                  PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
TEX. R. APP. P. 90
 
88-00556.F
 
 
File Date[01-02-89]
File Name[880556]