From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crain v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Apr 2, 2003
No. 05-02-00484-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 2, 2003)

Opinion

No. 05-02-00484-CR.

Opinion Filed April 2, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH, Tex.R.App.P. 47.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F01-37083-K. Affirmed.

Before Justices MORRIS, WHITTINGTON, and FRANCIS.


OPINION


The trial court found Richard Jay Crain guilty of burglary of a habitation and assessed punishment at four years in prison and a $1000 fine. In two issues, appellant contends the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm. Stephen and Tracy Green lived with Stephen's sister, Marquette Bellas, on Helmet Street in Irving. On May 21, 2001, the Greens were arrested by Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents. The following day, Tracey was released from jail, but Stephen was not. In the time between Tracey's arrest and release, Bellas's residence was burglarized. All of the appliances, clothing, food — essentially anything "that was of value" — was stolen. Police developed several suspects in the burglary, one of whom was appellant. He was ultimately arrested and gave a written statement confessing to entering Bellas's residence and taking two of Stephen's shirts without Stephen's permission. Appellant told the police where they could find the shirts, and the police recovered them. At trial, Stephen identified the shirts retrieved by the police as belonging to him. Appellant's written confession was admitted as evidence without objection. Denise Foster knew appellant. The day after the Greens' arrests, appellant came to her house and showed her "clothes and stuff" that came from Bellas's house. Foster went to appellant's house, where he showed her CDs, portable radios, and food that was taken from the Helmet Street residence. Foster then went to Bellas's house and stole two bags of clothing that were in the living room. Foster was ultimately charged as a juvenile for taking the property. Appellant's mother, Marilyn Crain, said appellant called her, upset and crying, after he was arrested. Ms. Crain testified her son told her the police threatened to send his girlfriend to jail if he "didn't tell the truth" about the burglary. Appellant testified the police threatened to put him in jail for a long time if he did not cooperate. Appellant said he never read the statement he signed. He denied telling the police he broke into the Bellas's residence and stole two shirts. According to appellant, he told the police he had clothes of the same brand as those taken, and the police asked if they could see those articles. Appellant arranged for his shirts to be made available to the police. In his first and second issues, appellant contends the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support his conviction. Specifically, he argues his confession was "procured by threat" and should be disregarded, and that without his confession, there is no evidence to corroborate the accomplice testimony of Foster. Thus, he concludes there is legally and factually insufficient evidence to show he entered Bellas's residence. Appellant's argument, however, ignores the fact that all evidence admitted at trial — whether properly or improperly admitted — is considered in reviewing the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. Wilson v. State, 7 S.W.3d 136, 141 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) (legal); Young v. State, 976 S.W.2d 771, 773 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist] 1998, pet. ref'd) (op. on motion for reh'g) (factual). Here, the confession was admitted at trial without any objection by appellant. Thus, because the confession was admitted into evidence, it could be used by the trial court in determining guilt, and we consider it in our review of the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. In the confession, appellant admitted entering the Helmet Street residence and taking two of Stephen's shirts without permission. Appellant made arrangements for the police to retrieve the two shirts. At trial, Stephen testified the shirts looked exactly like two shirts belonging to him. Stephen testified he did not lend the shirts to appellant or otherwise discuss the shirts with appellant. He further testified the shirts were at his house before he was arrested and jailed. Finally, Foster testified that appellant showed her property, including clothing, that he said came from "Steve's house." This evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support appellant's conviction for burglary of habitation. We resolve appellant's issues against him. We affirm the trial court's judgment.


Summaries of

Crain v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Apr 2, 2003
No. 05-02-00484-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 2, 2003)
Case details for

Crain v. State

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD JAY CRAIN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Apr 2, 2003

Citations

No. 05-02-00484-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 2, 2003)