Young, Keven, PD-1378-14

Victim Desmond Poe was found shot dead in the garage of Ebony Chandler’s home; the bullet was recovered from the garage wall and the medical examiner ruled the death a homicide.
Sisters Ebony and LaShondra Chandler testified they were at the scene; both said Young displayed a gun, left after a shot was fired, but neither witnessed the actual shooting. Ebony tested positive for gunshot residue (GSR); Young was not tested and no murder weapon was recovered.
Police recovered the bullet, found no shell casings (forensic evidence indicated a revolver), did not search the house thoroughly for a weapon or check Young’s vehicle for GSR, and did not subpoena Young’s phone records.
Young was tried by jury, convicted of murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine; the Second Court of Appeals (Fort Worth) affirmed on August 29, 2014.
Young filed a petition for discretionary review to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals claiming the evidence was factually insufficient to support the conviction, emphasizing witness contradictions and alleged investigative omissions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to support murder conviction	Young: Evidence is factually insufficient because (1) sisters’ accounts conflict and neither saw the shooting, (2) only sister with GSR was Ebony, (3) investigators failed to test Young’s truck, search the home for weapon/casings, obtain phone records, or investigate alternate suspects — creating reasonable doubt	State: When evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the sisters’ consistent core testimony plus corroborating circumstantial evidence (Young’s arrival and confrontation, his display of a gun, his departure after the shot, a text message from Young’s number, testimony that Young owned/was seen with a gun, and the recovered fatal bullet) permit a rational jury to convict; credibility/resolution of conflicts is for the jury	Court of Appeals affirmed: a rational juror could find Young guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the court deferred to jury credibility determinations and refused to reweigh evidence

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (sets constitutional standard for sufficiency review: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
Winfrey v. State, 393 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (clarifies deference to the jury as factfinder and standards for reviewing circumstantial evidence)
Zuniga v. State, 144 S.W.3d 477 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (addresses standards for factual sufficiency review)
Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (circumstantial evidence may be as probative as direct evidence)
Moff v. State, 131 S.W.3d 485 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (discusses appellate review of evidence admitted at trial and the weight given to it)