Bobby Joe Evens v. State
06-15-00081-CR
| Tex. Crim. App. | Sep 11, 2015Background
- Appellant Bobby Joe Evens was convicted in Hunt County, Texas for possession with intent to deliver cocaine (over 4 g but less than 200 g) arising from events on May 26, 2010 involving co-actor Misty Lynett Brigham.
- Law enforcement stopped Evens and Brigham after motel activity; Brigham was arrested and later surrendered 187.3 grams of cocaine seized at booking.
- The State introduced Evens’s prior federal trial testimony (admitting the drugs were his and describing drug-distribution practices) and jail-call recordings showing he directed Brigham and others while incarcerated.
- Forensic testing confirmed the recovered substance was cocaine base (187.3 g).
- At punishment the State introduced pen packets and judgments and Evens’s admissions establishing multiple prior felony convictions in sequence; the jury sentenced him as a habitual offender to 75 years, and the trial court imposed consecutive sentences.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Appellant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Legal sufficiency of evidence for manufacture/delivery/possession with intent | Evidence (Brigham’s testimony, Evens’s prior federal testimony, jail calls, photos, canine hit, lab results) proved every element beyond a reasonable doubt | Evens contested sufficiency (implicitly via appeal) — argued facts did not support conviction | Court affirmed: evidence legally sufficient when viewed in light most favorable to verdict |
| 2. Validity of habitual-offender enhancement and sentence length (25 years to life range; 75-yr sentence) | Pen packets, judgments, and Evens’s admissions established two prior felonies in sequence; abundant punishment evidence supported 75 years and consecutive sentences | Evens challenged appropriateness of sentence and cumulative sentencing | Court affirmed: enhancements proven and punishment evidence justified habitual-offender sentence and consecutive terms |
Key Cases Cited
- Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (standard for appellate review of sufficiency)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 433 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (reasonable juror standard for sufficiency review)
- Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (appellate courts must not re-weigh evidence or credibility)
- Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (appellate review must consider all evidence the jury actually heard)
- Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (unobjected-to hearsay relied upon by the jury retains probative value on sufficiency review)
- Threadgill v. State, 146 S.W.3d 654 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (discussing inferences and weight of the evidence)
- Chambers v. State, 711 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (rules on hearsay and jury consideration)
- Fernandez v. State, 805 S.W.2d 451 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (treatment of hearsay in jury factfinding)