Brent Justice v. State, 532 S.W.3d 862

Appellant and co-defendant Ashley Richards produced and distributed graphic "crush" videos showing the torture and killing of small animals, including a puppy; Richards confessed to committing the acts and appellant admitted filming them.
The State charged appellant with cruelty to a nonlivestock animal based solely on the puppy video; appellant proceeded to a nonjury trial representing himself and was convicted.
The trial judge found a deadly-weapon enhancement and, based on two prior aggravated-assault felonies, sentenced appellant to 50 years' imprisonment.
On appeal appointed counsel argued the evidence was insufficient; appellant also filed pro se issues, including that the deadly-weapon finding cannot apply when the victim is nonhuman.
The State conceded the prior-cruelty aggravator was not proved, meaning the proper offense grade would be a state-jail felony rather than a third-degree felony.
The court found legally sufficient evidence that appellant was criminally liable as a party (he encouraged, filmed, and handed the knife to Richards), reformed the judgment to a state-jail felony, deleted the deadly-weapon finding in light of binding precedent, and remanded for a new punishment hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to convict appellant	Evidence shows appellant solicited, encouraged, aided, and filmed the killing, supporting party liability	Appellant argued he was not the principal and did not personally commit the killing	Evidence was sufficient to support conviction for state-jail felony under party theory
Proper grade of offense	State initially sought third-degree felony but conceded aggravating priors for cruelty were not proved	Appellant argued improper enhancement	Court reformed judgment to state-jail felony because two prior cruelty convictions were not proved
Applicability of law-of-parties pleading	State argued law of parties need not be pled	Appellant argued indictment/record unclear whether court applied law of parties	Court held law of parties need not be pled; in nonjury trial judge presumed to apply law correctly
Deadly-weapon finding when victim is nonhuman	State initially maintained finding; later conceded after relevant authority	Appellant argued deadly-weapon finding invalid because victim was an animal	Court deleted deadly-weapon finding in line with controlling authority limiting deadly-weapon findings to human victims

Robinson v. State, 466 S.W.3d 166 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Bowen v. State, 374 S.W.3d 427 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (remedy of reforming judgment to lesser offense and remanding for punishment)
Marable v. State, 85 S.W.3d 287 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (law-of-parties need not be alleged in indictment)
Coonradt v. State, 846 S.W.2d 874 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1992) (in nonjury trials judge is presumed to apply law correctly)
Humaran v. State, 478 S.W.3d 887 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015) (analysis on sufficiency under party liability)