White v. StateWhite v. State
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Countiss
Appellant was convicted of aggravated kidnapping,
*294 The victim M___ C_._, testified to the following sequence of events. Walking home from her boyfriend’s house, shе observed appellant and two other men. After she ignored the men when one called to her, appellant approached her, displayed a gun and tоld her to come with him. She went, because he had a gun and because she was afrаid. They went into a vacant house and the victim observed a mattress on the floor. Appellant, pointing the gun at her, told her to remove her pants. She refused: “I told him, no, I wаsn’t going to let him rape me.” Appellant responded by asking her if she thought he was plаying, and opened the gun to show her that it was loaded. She then jumped through a window and rаn away. Appellant pursued her, but she escaped, went to a restroom and сleaned up, then went to her aunt’s house and called police. M... C„_ identified appellant in a photographic spread, a lineup, and at trial as her assailant.
In determining whether the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction for thе offense charged, the applicable standard of review is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational triеr of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a rеasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). See also Houston v. State, 663 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex.Crim.App.1984); Wilson v. State, 654 S.W.2d 465, 471 (Tex.Crim.App.1983). In applying that standard, we remain aware of two ancillary concepts. First, the jury is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and may аccept or reject all or any part of the testimony. Johnson v. State, 571 S.W.2d 170, 173 (Tex.Crim.App.1978). Secоnd, it is not necessary that every fact directly and independently point to the accused’s guilt; it is enough if the conclusion is warranted by the combined and cumulative forcе of all the incriminating circumstances. Flores v. State, 551 S.W.2d 364, 367 (tex.Crim.App.1977).
The crime of kidnapping becomes aggrаvated if, in addition to the abduction, the defendant intends to commit one of six other sрecific acts.
In this case, appellant took the complainant at gunpoint into a room furnished only with a mattress, instructed her to remove her pants, responded to her assertion that she would not allow him to rape her by asking her if she thought he was joking, showed her the bullets in his gun, and pursued her when she rаn from him. That evidence is sufficient for the jury to find that appellant intended to sexually abuse the complainant.
Appellant argues that an analysis of the pertinent case law reveals only four situations where intent sufficient to aggravate the crimе can be found from something less than a completed sexual act:
(1) the defendant’s exhibition of his or her sex organs. Sanders v. State, 605 S.W.2d 612, 614 (Tex.Crim.App.1980).
(2) the defendant’s touching of private portions of the victim’s body. Phillips v. State, 597 S.W.2d 929, 932 (Tex.Crim.App.1980).
*295 (3) the defendant’s stated desire to engage in a sexual act with the victim. Prescott v. State, 610 S.W.2d 760, 761 (Tex.Crim.App.1981).
(4) the defendant’s offering of money to the victim in return fоr sexual cooperation. Garza v. State, 632 S.W.2d 823, 828 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1982, pet. granted).
We agree that the events exemplified by the cited cases are evidence of intent sufficient to trigger the aggravating element; we do not, however, endow the list with exclusive status. Any admissible evidence that reveals the intent to do one of the six aggravating events will support the verdict and, the imagination of humans being unlimited, it is futile to attempt to quantify the specific acts that will suffice. Cеrtainly here, from the evidence recited above, the jury could conclude thаt appellant intended to violate or abuse the victim sexually. Ground of error one is overruled.
The judgment is affirmed.
Notes
The six acts are:
1. hold the victim for ransom or reward;
2. use the victim as a shield or hostage;
3. facilitate the commission of a felony or the flight after the attеmpt or commission of a felony;
4. inflict bodily injury on the victim or violate or abuse the victim sexually;
5. terrorize the victim or a third person; or
6. interfere with the performance of any governmental or political function.