Samuel Joel Esparza v. State, 12-16-00105-CR

Appellant Samuel Joel Esparza was tried for aggravated sexual assault of S.B., an eight‑year‑old child; jury convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Initial outcry: S.B. told her mother Y.B. that Appellant had put his "wiener" in her; Y.B. initially disbelieved the claim.
Y.B. later testified Appellant (while under influence of K2) confessed to touching S.B.; medical and investigative personnel were notified and a safety plan removed Appellant from the home.
Pediatric nurse practitioner Jane Riley testified S.B. told her Appellant put his "tee tee" in her private, described a "whitish" fluid, and disclosed anal touching; Riley believed the account despite lack of physical findings.
At trial S.B. recanted, denying any touching and saying prior statements were untrue; prosecution presented testimony explaining why children may recant or be hesitant in court (forensic interviewer and nurse).
The jury credited the prosecution witnesses and discredited the recantation; the court of appeals affirmed the conviction on legal sufficiency review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Legal sufficiency of the evidence to support aggravated sexual assault of a child	State: testimony from S.B.'s earlier statements, Riley, investigators, and corroborating investigative findings suffice to prove penetration/contact beyond reasonable doubt	Esparza: S.B. recanted at trial and remaining evidence raises only suspicion, not proof beyond reasonable doubt	Court: Evidence sufficient; jury entitled to disbelieve recantation and credit prosecution witnesses; conviction affirmed

Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (standard for reviewing legal sufficiency of the evidence)
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (circumstantial evidence as probative as direct evidence; deference to jury on credibility)
Chambers v. State, 805 S.W.2d 459 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (factfinder decides weight of recantation evidence)
Chavez v. State, 324 S.W.3d 785 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2010) (conviction can be upheld despite recantations)