Kieschnick v. State

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

VANCE, Justice.

The State relied on circumstantial evidence in this case for an essential part of its proof. In a motion for rehearing, Kiesehnick assails us for using the standard of review mandated by Geesa v. State in the absence of an instruction in the court’s charge defining “reasonable doubt.” Geesa v. State, 820 S.W.2d 154, 161-62 (Tex.Crim.App.1991).

When we turn to Geesa for further guidance in determining the applicable standard of review, we find this directive about the reasonable-doubt instruction:

We expressly adopt [the specified] instruction on…