Valdez, Osbaldo, PD-0466-15

Petitioner Osbaldo Valdez was tried and convicted by a Tarrant County jury for aggravated robbery (Feb 13, 2014); sentence: 99 years as a repeat offender.
Robbery at a Metro PCS: masked Hispanic male in gray hoodie/sweatpants demanded money and a phone; clerk could not identify the robber.
Witness R.H. followed a suspect, saw him discard outer clothing and drive a black car; later identified Valdez in a photo lineup and in court but expressed uncertainty during the photographic identifications.
Cell phone given to robber (LG Spirit) was activated the next day; records showed calls to numbers linked to Valdez’s relatives and residence; police observed a car matching the description and arrested Valdez.
No physical evidence (fingerprints, DNA, or stolen proceeds) connected Valdez to the robbery; defense emphasized the weak, hesitant eyewitness ID and visible tattoos on Valdez that R.H. did not report.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to prove Valdez was the robber	State: photo IDs, in-court ID, phone records linking LG Spirit to Valdez’s contacts, surveillance of his residence and car support conviction	Valdez: eyewitness ID was hesitant and equivocal; witness failed to note defendant’s tattoos; no physical evidence or proceeds tie him to the crime	Second Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction; Petitioner seeks discretionary review arguing legal insufficiency

Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (standard for sufficiency review and deference to jury on credibility)
Burden v. State, 55 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (Jackson standard application in Texas sufficiency review)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (evidence sufficient if any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
Muniz v. State, 851 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (appellate review does not reweigh evidence or reassess witness credibility)