William Dee v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 25th Judicial District Court of Guadalupe County

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-06-00134-CR

William Joseph DEE,

Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,

Appellee
From the 25th Judicial District Courts, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 05-1160-CR

Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 11, 2006

AFFIRMED

The trial court found defendant, William Dee, guilty on thirteen counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and thirteen counts of indecency with a child, and assessed punishment at ten years', twenty years', and forty years' confinement. On appeal, defendant challenges the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

On appeal, defendant asserts the evidence is legally and factually insufficient because no physical evidence exists, a nurse found no evidence of trauma or sexual assault, no eye witnesses testified, and defendant denied the allegations. We review the sufficiency of the evidence under the appropriate standards of review. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 2789 (1979) (legal sufficiency); Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735, 740 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (same); Zuniga v. State, 144 S.W.3d 477, 481-85 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (factual sufficiency); Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126, 129 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (same).

The complainant R.B.P., who was twelve years old at trial, testified to numerous incidents of touching, vaginal penetration with defendant's finger, and oral sex over a period of seven years. In defendant's statement, he admitted to touching R.B.P.'s vagina. Although there was no physical evidence to support the allegations, there is no requirement that a victim's testimony of sexual penetration be corroborated by medical or physical evidence. Kemple v. State, 725 S.W.2d 483, 485 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.). We conclude the evidence that was adduced at trial was sufficient to support the judgment on all counts. See Ruiz v. State, 891 S.W.2d 302, 304 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1994, pet. ref'd) (testimony of child victim alone sufficient to support conviction for sexual assault).

CONCLUSION

We overrule defendant's issue on appeal and affirm the trial court's judgment.

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH