Dante Coleman v. State, 01-13-00255-CR

Appellant Dante Coleman was convicted of burglary of a habitation in Harris County, Texas, based on evidence at trial that a burglary occurred at Resa Castillo’s home on December 2, 2009.
Castillos left their home for work that morning; later that day a neighbor observed a man, identified as Coleman, near the back of the house and looking into a window.
Dupuis testified she saw Coleman near the residence, then observed him run to a car, open the back door, and join the front passenger seat in a vehicle matching an earlier sighting.
Castillo’s stepson found a broken window and tipped-over golf clubs; a DVD player and 17 movies were later found at a pawn shop with Coleman’s name on the pawn slip and his identification used.
A pawn-shop clerk identified Coleman as the person who sold the items and testified he negotiated the sale; Dupuis identified Coleman from a photo array and at trial.
The jury returned a guilty verdict; the trial court sentenced Coleman to 15 years in prison.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence proves entry of the habitation as charged	Coleman asserts the State failed to prove he entered the home.	State relied on look-alike or conspiratorial theories without direct entry proof.	Evidence was sufficient to prove entry by Coleman

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sufficiency standard: rational juror could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
Byrd v. State, 336 S.W.3d 242 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (reaffirmation of Jackson standard for sufficiency review)
Matlock v. State, 392 S.W.3d 662 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (circumstantial evidence considered with direct evidence)
Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (clarifies sufficiency evaluation under Jackson)
Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (principles for evaluating circumstantial evidence)
Williams v. State, 235 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (confirms deference to jury's factual resolutions)
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (fact-finder credibility and inference sufficiency)
Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (treats direct and circumstantial evidence equally)