Mangham v. State

Phipps, Judge.

Richard Mangham, Jr., challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his conviction for the aggravated child molestation of A. W We affirm.

When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, we construe the evidence in a light most favorable to the verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. We neither weigh the evidence nor assess witness credibility, but merely determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.

A. W testified that one night in July 2004,…