Cole Canyon Lockhart v. State
13-13-00607-CR
| Tex. App. | Oct 20, 2016Background
- Appellant Cole Canyon Lockhart was convicted of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (enhanced to a second-degree felony) and possession of a controlled substance; this opinion addresses only the firearm conviction on remand.
- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals vacated the Court of Appeals’ judgment as to the firearm conviction and remanded for consideration of Lockhart’s sufficiency challenge; other convictions and rulings were left intact.
- Police executing a search warrant at a cabin found a .22-caliber bolt-action rifle in the cabin, not on Lockhart’s person.
- Evidence tying Lockhart to the cabin included an eyeglass prescription in his name found at the location and parts of a chainsaw in a duffle bag near the rifle; an acquaintance testified Lockhart occasionally stored a .22 rifle at the acquaintance’s house and once took it away.
- Lockhart argued the State failed to establish an affirmative link between him and the seized rifle; the Court of Appeals reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence under Jackson v. Virginia standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon | The State: evidence and reasonable inferences establish Lockhart knowingly possessed the rifle | Lockhart: no affirmative link shows the rifle was his or that he had control of it | Affirmed — a rational juror could find affirmative links (prescription in his name, proximity of personal items, testimony about his owning/storing a .22 rifle) sufficient to support conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Winfrey v. State, 393 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Gear v. State, 340 S.W.3d 743 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (sufficiency review and Jackson framework)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (constitutional sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard)
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (deference to jury credibility and weight determinations)
- Villarreal v. State, 286 S.W.3d 321 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (hypothetically correct jury charge concept)
- Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (defining hypothetically correct jury charge)
- Williams v. State, 313 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (affirmative-link requirement when contraband not on person)
- Smith v. State, 176 S.W.3d 907 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005) (factors used to evaluate affirmative links to contraband)