JUAN CARLOS ROBLES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

AFFIRM and Opinion Filed September 30, 2008
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-07-00980-CR
No. 05-07-00981-CR
............................
 
JUAN CARLOS ROBLES, Appellant
 
V.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
 
.............................................................
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F06-60767-WI, F06-60768-WI
.............................................................
 
OPINION
 
Before Justices Morris, Whittington, and O'Neill
Opinion By Justice O'Neill
 
 
        A jury convicted Juan Carlos Robles of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault on a public servant and assessed punishment at seven years' and fifteen years' imprisonment, respectively. In two issues, appellant contends the evidence is factually insufficient to support the convictions. We affirm the trial court's judgments.
Background
 
        Dawn Correa lived with appellant for two months in 2005. The day after Christmas, Correa moved across the parking lot into her own second floor apartment. On New Year's Eve, Correa invited appellant and four other friends to her apartment for a party. Correa testified they all smoked marijuana, but she did not recall seeing any other type of drugs or alcohol there. Eventually everyone left except appellant. Appellant asked Correa to “draw him a bath.” Correa did not think it was strange that appellant wanted to bathe at her apartment because she and appellant had been roommates. When Correa came out of the bathroom, appellant grabbed her around the neck and began yelling for the police to come and talk to Correa. Appellant said Correa had left him and he did not give her permision to do so. Appellant held Correa tightly around the waist and led her to the front door. Appellant screamed for the police to talk sense into Correa and that he did not give her permission to leave. After appellant opened the front door and walked her outside on the landing, Correa tried to get away. Appellant stabbed Correa in the hand and said, “[I] told you not to move.” Correa testified she later received ten stitches in her hand to close the wound. After appellant stabbed Correa's hand, Correa saw a female police officer at the bottom of the stairs. The officer's uniform was clearly visible in the lights from the apartments. Appellant became more upset when he saw the officer. Appellant said he wanted a male officer. Appellant walked down the steps while holding Correa in front of him. Appellant “slashed” the knife at the officer and said, “[O]h, you want some, too.” The officer used her baton to deflect the knife. Appellant said he was going to count to three and if she did not bring a male officer, he was going to kill Correa. Appellant counted to three, then stabbed Correa in the stomach. The officer shot appellant. Correa was transported to a hospital.
        Officer Jacquelyn Tahbone testified that on January 1, 2006, she heard the dispatcher announce a disturbance involving a knife at the apartment complex she was patrolling. Tahbone heard a woman screaming. Tahbone saw appellant holding Correa around the waist while standing on an upstairs landing. Tahbone told appellant to let Correa go. Appellant came down the steps towards Tahbone with his arm raised above his head. Tahbone then realized appellant had a knife. Tahbone could not shoot appellant because he was using Correa as a shield. Tahbone testified appellant “slashed” at her with the knife about twelve times, and she feared he would stab her. Tahbone deflected the knife with her flashlight and baton, then pulled out her gun and aimed at appellant. Appellant stabbed Correa in the stomach. Correa twisted to the left, and Tahbone shot appellant once in the chest. As Correa ran away from him, appellant tried to stab her again, then fell on the ground. Other officers handcuffed appellant and called for paramedics.
        Officer Michael Graesser testified he responded to a disturbance call at the complex. After he parked behind Tahbone's patrol car, he heard a gunshot. Graesser saw Correa with a bloody spot on her abdomen running from the side of a nearby building. When Graesser asked Correa where was Tahbone, Correa pointed in the direction of the gunshot. Graesser ran around the building and saw Tahbone pointing her gun at appellant, who was on the ground. Graesser testified appellant was “thrashing around” to avoid being handcuffed. Graesser and another officer eventually handcuffed appellant and called for paramedics.
        Appellant testified he and a friend went to Correa's apartment at 1:00 a.m. on January 1, 2006. After eating a plate of food he brought, they all used drugs, including cocaine, marijuana, and crack cocaine. After using the drugs, appellant felt “depressed” and that “something wasn't right,” so he told the other people to leave. Appellant asked Correa if he could take a bath. When Correa went to the bathroom to run water in the tub, appellant saw someone trying to open the front door. Appellant asked Correa if she knew who was at the door. Correa said no. Appellant pulled out his cell phone and called 911. The operator could not understand him, so he asked Correa to tell the operator the address. Correa, who was standing next to the dining room table with a knife in her hand, refused. Appellant testified he did not believe Correa was going to attack him with the knife. Appellant asked Correa why she did not want to tell the police her address when someone was trying to knock down her door. Correa said if appellant called the police then “something was going to happen to me and to her as well.” Appellant began yelling for the police because he thought the police would not be able to find him otherwise. Appellant decided to go outside and wait for the police. Appellant grabbed Correa, took the knife from her, and moved her to the front door. After they went outside on the front balcony, appellant yelled for the downstairs neighbor, who came outside and asked what was going on. Appellant told the neighbor to call the police.
        Appellant testified he was afraid someone was going to kill him while he was outside because he saw someone standing about ten feet in front of Correa. Appellant did not know the person was a police officer because he was “cowering down” behind Correa. Appellant denied he threatened to stab Correa unless a male officer arrived on the scene. Appellant testified he knew he stabbed Correa at some point, but he did not know when nor did he intentionally stab her. Appellant did not recall using the knife to stab at a police officer, and denied hearing anyone yelling at him to drop the knife. After appellant realized he had stabbed Correa, he let her go. Appellant saw someone pointing a gun at him. He realized he was shot at the same time he heard the gunshot.
        During cross-examination, appellant testified he had a clear memory of what occurred that evening, and although he was not completely in his right mind at the time of the incident, his drug usage did not cause his actions. Appellant denied being “jealous and enraged” because his relationship with Correa had ended. He claimed someone was trying to break into Correa's apartment. Appellant denied he told Correa she had no right to leave or did not have permission to leave, but admitted he grabbed Correa, took a knife from her hand, and continued holding onto Correa. Appellant testified he did so because he wanted Correa to give her address to the police. When he took Correa outside on the balcony, he saw a man standing outside. The man called out to appellant and said, “[Y]ou're going to die.” Appellant denied he was in “hand-to-hand combat” with an officer or anyone while holding the knife, and testified he never saw a police officer until he was being handcuffed. Appellant admitted he held Correa “against her will” because she was trying to get away, but testified the stabbing to Correa's stomach was accidental. Appellant did not recall stabbing Correa in the hand while on the balcony.
Applicable Law
 
        In a factual sufficiency review, we view all of the evidence in a neutral light to determine whether the fact-finder's verdict of guilt was rationally justified. See Roberts v. State, 220 S.W.3d 521, 524 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404, 415 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); see also Marshall v. State, 210 S.W.3d 618, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Unless the record clearly reveals a different result is appropriate, we must defer to the fact-finder's determination concerning what weight to be given to contradictory testimony. Lancon v. State, 253 S.W.3d 699, 705 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
        To obtain a conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused bodily injury to Correa by stabbing her with a knife, a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.01(a)(1), 22.02(a)(2) (Vernon Supp. 2008). To obtain a conviction for aggravated assault on a public servant, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant intentionally or knowingly threatened Tahbone, a person appellant knew was a public servant engaged in the lawful discharge of an official duty, with imminent bodily injury, and appellant used or exhibited a deadly weapon, a knife, during commission of the assault. Id. §§ 22.01(a)(2), 22.02(a)(2), (b)(2)(B).
 
 
Discussion
 
        Appellant argues the evidence is factually insufficient because he did not act with the requisite intent to commit either offense. Appellant asserts the evidence shows he was in a drug- induced delusion, was trying to protect Correa from a perceived assailant, and had no knowledge that an officer was present at the scene. The State responds that the evidence is factually sufficient to support appellant's convictions.
        There was conflicting evidence. Correa testified appellant intentionally stabbed her in the hand when she tried to get away from him, and intentionally stabbed her in the stomach after he told Tahbone he would kill her if a male officer did not arrive on the scene. Correa also testified she clearly saw Tahbone's police uniform, and that appellant used her as a shield while he tried to stab Tahbone.
        Tahbone testified she had to deflect appellant's knife with her flashlight and baton after he intentionally tried to stab her several times. Appellant used Correa as a shield, preventing Tahbone from shooting him, before he stabbed Correa in the stomach. Tahbone testified that when appellant first saw her, he demanded to have a male officer brought to the scene or he would kill Correa.
        Appellant testified he did not know Tahbone was a police officer and he did not try to stab her with the knife. Appellant admitted he used drugs on the day of the assaults, but testified he had a clear memory of what had occurred and his actions were not due to the drugs he ingested. Appellant admitted he held Correa in front of him as he went down the stairs and that he stabbed her in the stomach. Appellant claimed he stabbed Correa in the stomach accidentally, and denied stabbing her in the hand.
         It was the jury's function to resolve any conflicts in the evidence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.04 (Vernon 1979); Lancon, 253 S.W.3d at 705. The jury was in the best position to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence, and we must afford due deference to its determination. See Marshall, 210 S.W.3d at 625. The jury was free to accept or reject any and all of the evidence presented by either side. See Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103, 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). Moreover, voluntary intoxication does not constitute a defense to the commision of a crime. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 8.04 (Vernon 2003).
        Viewing the evidence under the proper standard, we conclude it is factually sufficient to support appellant's convictions. See Roberts, 220 S.W.3d at 524. We resolve appellant's two issues against him.
        We affirm the trial court's judgments.
 
 
 
                                                          
                                                          MICHAEL J. O'NEILL
                                                          JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
070980F.U05