Dixon v. State

OPINION

YAIDIK, Judge.

Case Summary

Donald Dixon (“Dixon”) appeals his conviction for invasion of privacy as a Class A misdemeanor. Dixon contends that his conviction should be reversed because the trial court abused its discretion by admitting hearsay testimony and because there is insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction. Finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion and that there was sufficient evidence for the trial court to reasonably find Dixon guilty of invasion of privacy, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

On July 17, 2006, a trial court issued an ex parte order…