Opinion
No. 04-03-00258-CR
Delivered and Filed: December 3, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2002-CR-4034, Honorable Juanita A. Vasquez-Gardner, Judge Presiding. Affirmed.
Sitting: SARAH B. DUNCAN, Justice, SANDEE BRYAN MARION, Justice, PHYLIS J. SPEEDLIN, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found defendant, Juan de la Rosa, guilty of theft, and the trial court assessed punishment at eight years' confinement. In three issues on appeal, defendant challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence and asserts the trial court erred in denying his motions for a directed verdict and for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. We review each of these complaints as a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789 (1979) (legal sufficiency); Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735, 740 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) (same); Williams v. State, 937 S.W.2d 479, 482 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996) (directed verdict); Serrano v. State, 936 S.W.2d 387, 391 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, pet ref'd) (judgment notwithstanding the verdict). We affirm. On appeal, defendant asserts no rational trier of fact could have determined that he was the individual who committed the charged offense. Defendant contends he is not the same man shown in State's exhibit number 10, a photograph. During trial, David Lohaus, a San Antonio police officer, was shown two photographs, State's exhibits seven (of defendant) and ten (of defendant's brother). Lohaus positively identified defendant at the scene, in court, and in State's exhibit number 7 as the man he saw stealing a trailer and as the man who ran away when Lohaus approached the scene. About ten minutes after fleeing, defendant was found by James Friste, another San Antonio police officer who works with the canine unit. Friste, with his dog, discovered defendant hiding in a flower bed near the scene of the offense. At trial, Friste positively identified defendant in court and in State's exhibit number 7 as the man he found in the flower bed. This evidence is legally sufficient to support the jury's verdict; therefore, we affirm the trial court's judgment.