David Fitzgerald Clayton a/k/a David F. Clayton, Jr. a/k/a David Fitzgerald Clayton, Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 252nd District Court of Jefferson County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-10-00081-CR ________________________ DAVID FITZGERALD CLAYTON A/K/A DAVID F. CLAYTON, JR. A/K/A DAVID FITZGERALD CLAYTON, JR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 08-04378 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted David Fitzgerald Clayton1 of aggravated sexual assault of a child. The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict. We affirm the judgment. The elements of aggravated sexual assault of a child, as applied in this case, are as follows: a person intentionally or knowingly causes the sexual organ of a child younger than fourteen to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person. 1 The record reflects that David Fitzgerald Clayton is also known as David F. Clayton, Jr. and David Fitzgerald Clayton, Jr. 1 See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ยง 22.021(a)(1)(B)(iii), (2)(B) (West Supp. 2010). Clayton challenges the factual sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction. In Brooks v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that the standard in Jackson v. Virginia 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. Brooks v. State, No. PD-0210-09, 2010 WL 3894613, at *14 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 6, 2010) (not yet released for publication); see also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). Therefore, we address Clayton s issue under the Jackson v. Virginia standard. We review all the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319; Ross v. State, 133 S.W.3d 618, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). The Jackson standard gives full play to the jury s responsibility to fairly resolve conflicts in the evidence, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. Williams v. State, 301 S.W.3d 675, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 3411, 177 L.Ed.2d 326, 78 U.S.L.W. 3729 (2010). The accounts of the events of that night are in conflict. L.H., the mother of elevenyear-old J.P., testified she found J.P. nude from the waist down on the side of Clayton s bed. Clayton was nude from the waist down. J.P. testified Clayton threatened her with a knife and sexually assaulted her. Clayton denied the assault and claimed L.H. wanted 2 drugs. The police found a knife on the bed and a child s pair of black flip-flops at the foot of the bed. The jury had a duty to resolve conflicts in the testimony, to weigh the evidence, and to draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts. Young v. State, 283 S.W.3d 854, 861 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 1015, 175 L.Ed. 2d 622, 78 U.S.L.W. 3360 (2009) (quoting Jackson, 443 U.S. at 319). The jury could reasonably find the accounts of L.H. and J.P. to be more credible than the account of Clayton. From the testimony of L.H., J.P., and the officers, and the presence of the physical evidence (knife on the bed and J.P. s flip-flops in Clayton s bedroom), the jury could reasonably conclude that Clayton committed the offense of aggravated sexual assault. Having reviewed all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude that a rational juror could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED. _______________________________ DAVID GAULTNEY Justice Submitted on November 18, 2010 Opinion Delivered January 12, 2011 Do Not Publish Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton JJ. 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.
