Harvey, Christopher David, PD-1354-15

On April 9, 2013 deputies Mabry and Ewing went to a residence to serve an arrest warrant on Christopher Harvey; they found him on a couch and attempted to handcuff him.
Harvey fled the house; deputies testified he elbowed/shouldered Mabry during the escape, knocking her to the ground.
Mabry later discovered a scrape on her knee several hours after the incident and described it as "painful." Ewing testified he did not see the scrape before the altercation and believed it resulted from the encounter.
Harvey testified (through a defense witness) he leapt past the deputies without making contact; the defense emphasized the lack of contemporaneous complaint or observation of injury.
Harvey was convicted of assault on a public servant (Tex. Penal Code §22.01) and sentenced to 65 years; the Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed, prompting this petition for discretionary review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Harvey)	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that Harvey caused Mabry's injury	Testimony that Harvey pushed/shouldered Mabry, she fell and later had a painful scrape; jury may infer causation and pain	Injury was noticed hours later after searches under the house; causation is speculative and insufficient to convict	Court of Appeals: Evidence sufficient; jury could infer result of defendant's conduct produced bodily injury
Prosecutor's punishment-phase references to prior sexual offense	Prosecutor argued Harvey was a "rapist" based on prior conviction; State relied on admitted prior conviction evidence	Defense: repeated references were improper and reversible	Court of Appeals: Argument forfeited because Harvey did not object at trial; Almanza standard not applied due to waiver

Lucio v. State, 351 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (standard for reviewing legal sufficiency under Jackson)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (reasonable-doubt sufficiency standard for criminal convictions)
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (circumstantial evidence and cumulative inference rule)
Lane v. State, 763 S.W.2d 785 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (broad interpretation of "bodily injury")
Brooks v. State, 967 S.W.2d 946 (Tex. App.—Austin 1998) (assault on public servant is result-oriented offense)
Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (egregious-or-harm analysis for unpreserved jury-argument error)
Cockrell v. State, 933 S.W.2d 73 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (preservation rule: failure to object to argument forfeits appellate review)