Joshua Aaron Bishop v. the State of Texas
03-19-00436-CR
| Tex. App. | Jun 24, 2021Background
- Feb. 12, 2018: a Black male wearing a white-skull mask, dark shirt, khaki pants, and Converse entered Mickie’s convenience store carrying a sawed-off shotgun, pointed it at attendants, demanded cash, and fled; the robbery was captured on store surveillance.
- The next day police located an abandoned vehicle containing a black/white backpack and shotgun shells; nearby home video showed a White driver exit the vehicle and a Black passenger wearing the same clothing and carrying a sawed-off shotgun run to a fence, toss something over it, and jump the fence.
- After a prolonged standoff that led to the driver’s arrest, Bishop (later identified by fingerprints) approached officers nearby, gave false names, admitted the backpacks were his and that he had thrown away a shotgun, declined to provide a DNA sample, and said jurors would find him guilty if they saw the video.
- A sawed-off shotgun was later found near the fence and lab testing produced DNA profiles from the mask and shotgun consistent with Bishop and the driver; officers also recovered a social-media selfie of Bishop wearing the distinctive mask.
- Store attendants could not definitively identify Bishop but agreed recovered items were similar; Bishop was indicted for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, convicted by a jury, sentenced to 20 years, and appealed arguing insufficient evidence as to identity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence to identify the robber | State: Video, unique firearm, recovered backpack/mask, DNA links, and Bishop's statements support identity | Bishop: Identity not proven; State relied on circumstantial "stacking" and inconclusive witness IDs | Affirmed: Under Jackson/Brooks, viewed in the light most favorable to verdict, a rational jury could find Bishop was the robber beyond a reasonable doubt |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (establishes jury credibility deference in sufficiency review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for legal-sufficiency review)
- Queeman v. State, 520 S.W.3d 616 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017) (conflicting inferences resolved for verdict in sufficiency review)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (rejects inference-stacking analysis in sufficiency review)
- Roberson v. State, 16 S.W.3d 156 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000) (identity may be proven by circumstantial evidence)