Brandon Bernard Battle v. State
06-15-00133-CR
| Tex. Crim. App. | Nov 19, 2015Background
- Defendant Brandon Bernard Battle was prosecuted in a bench trial for possession of methamphetamine (1–4 grams) and found guilty by the trial judge; he pled true to enhancements and was sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment.
- Facts: confidential informant Misti Millican arranged narcotics calls from her apartment; officers were present when she called dealers; Millican called Battle and later admitted she knew him as a dealer.
- When Battle arrived at Millican’s apartment, officers arrested him after a brief struggle; no drugs were found on his person.
- Officers later recovered two small baggies of methamphetamine (total 3.99 g) from the area by/behind the television several minutes after Battle was secured; no usable fingerprints were obtained.
- Millican at times said the drugs might be hers and at other times claimed them; video evidence and testimony raised disputes about whether Battle had opportunity to discard the items.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Legal sufficiency of evidence to prove Battle knowingly possessed methamphetamine | Battle: State presented insufficient circumstantial links tying him to the contraband; when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict the proof is inadequate | State (trial court): found Battle guilty based on the totality of evidence (presence at scene, phone contacts, officers’ observations, proximity of contraband) | Trial court convicted Battle; appellant appeals arguing legal insufficiency and asks reversal and rendition of acquittal |
| 2) Factual sufficiency of the evidence | Battle: neutral review of all evidence shows proof is so weak or outweighed by contrary proof that the finding is clearly wrong; many factors (Millican’s statements, video, delay in discovery, no fingerprints) undermine the verdict | State (trial court): weighed evidence and found guilt; prosecution relies on circumstantial links to support possession finding | Trial court convicted; appellant asserts factual-insufficiency and asks reversal and remand for new trial (notes CCA may revisit Brooks) |
| 3) Formal defect in judgment (degree of felony) | Battle: judgment incorrectly recites conviction as a 1st-degree felony though possession of 1–4 g meth is a 3rd-degree felony; requests modification to correct judgment | State/trial court: judgment as entered (but appellant notes statutory duty to enter a proper judgment) | Judgment shows defendant convicted and sentenced; appellant requests appellate correction to reflect third-degree offense |
Key Cases Cited
- Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (Jackson-style sufficiency standard and appellate review principles)
- Anderson v. State, 416 S.W.3d 884 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (limits on speculative inferences; standards for inferences from circumstantial evidence)
- Poindexter v. State, 153 S.W.3d 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (possession requires links when defendant lacks exclusive control of premises)
- Evans v. State, 202 S.W.3d 158 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (discussing required links and circumstantial evidence connecting accused to contraband)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (definition of inference vs. speculation)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (plurality on factual-insufficiency review; noted as potentially revisited by the CCA)
- Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (factual-sufficiency review principles)
- Triplett v. State, 292 S.W.3d 205 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2009) (factors list used to evaluate links connecting an accused to contraband)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (constitutional standard for legal sufficiency of evidence)