Legal Opinion

Hankins v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District

Decided August 22, 2002No. 13-99-670-CRPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Opinion by

Justice BAIRD.

Appellant was charged by information with the offense of indecent exposure. A jury found appellant guilty of the charged offense. The trial judge assessed punishment at 180 days confinement, probated, and a fine of $300. Appellant raises three points of error. We affirm.

I. Sufficiency of the Evidence.

Appellant contends the evidence is legally insufficient to support the jury’s verdict. Legal sufficiency is the constitutional minimum required by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to sustain a criminal conviction. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Adams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  3. DeVaughn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
  4. Graham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1983
  5. Gengnagel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Coleman v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2004
  2. Galliford v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2003
  3. State v. JorgensenSupreme Court of Iowa · 2008
  4. Stadt v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2003
  5. State v. VelasquezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2016

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API