Sorrells v. State
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 874
Tex. Crim. App.2011Background
- Appellant Sorrells was convicted by a Travis County jury of aggravated robbery.
- Thirteenth Court of Appeals held the evidence insufficient to prove aggravated robbery and reformed to assault by threat.
- State sought discretionary review on three grounds: sufficiency review, law of parties, and reform of judgment.
- Court of Appeals believed the necklace theft and the assault were not sufficiently connected.
- Evidence included: gun in appellant's jacket, necklace found in Hardeman's jacket, and witnesses identifying appellant with the weapon.
- This Court reversed, holding the evidence sufficient to prove theft and that the assault occurred in the course of the theft.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove theft and nexus | State argues evidence viewed cumulatively supports theft and nexus | Sorrells argues motive may negate nexus | Evidence sufficient; nexus proven |
| Identity of the thief | Combined evidence shows appellant wore the jacket and possessed the gun | Only Hardeman wore the jacket; possession not shown | Appellant properly identified as thief based on cumulative evidence |
| Nexus between theft and assault | The theft occurred immediately after assault, supporting nexus | Alternative motive could negate nexus | Nexus proven; assault in the course of theft |
Key Cases Cited
- Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772 (Tex.Cr.App.2007) (standard for sufficiency review in circumstantial cases; permits inferential proof)
- Cooper v. State, 67 S.W.3d 221 (Tex.Cr.App.2002) (nexus between assault and theft; immediate after theft may support inference)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex.Cr.App.2007) (general framework for sufficiency review and weighing evidence)