No. 01-02-00125-CR.
Opinion Issued March 13, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH, Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
Appeal from the 232nd District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 881912.
Before Justices HEDGES, JENNINGS, and ALCALA.
ELSA ALCALA, Justice.
After a jury convicted appellant, Sheryl Anna Loving, of assault on a public servant, the trial court assessed punishment at five years' confinement, suspended the sentence, and ordered appellant placed on five years' community supervision. In her sole point of error, appellant challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support her conviction. We affirm.
Facts
While at a Houston bar, appellant and her boyfriend became highly intoxicated. After appellant attacked another patron, the bar's bouncer attempted to calm appellant. Appellant's boyfriend repeatedly jumped on the bouncer's back, and the three eventually made their way out the back door of the bar. Off-duty Houston Police Officer I.A. Rodriguez and another officer, who worked at the bar, were called to help. They found appellant screaming obscenities and acting aggressively. The officers arrested appellant and her boyfriend for public intoxication. While sitting on a curb after her arrest, appellant slipped out of her handcuffs and sprinted into the roadway. Officer Rodriguez chased appellant, caught her, managed to pull her out of the street, and wrestled her to the ground. While Rodriguez was attempting to handcuff appellant, she fought him and scratched him on the neck with her fingernail. Rodriguez sustained a scratch injury that measured about three inches long. The scratch broke the skin, bled, and hurt. Officer Rodriguez was treated at the scene for potential infection. Legal Sufficiency Challenge
A challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction questions whether the record evidence could reasonably support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence, in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89 (1979); Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103, 111 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). A person commits the offense of felony assault by causing bodily injury to a public servant while the public servant is performing official duties, and the person knows the assaulted person is a public servant. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 1.07(41)(A), 22.01(a)(1), and 22.01(b)(1) (Vernon 1994 Supp. 2003). Appellant contends that the State did not offer legally sufficient evidence to prove that she caused bodily injury to Officer Rodriguez. Appellant concedes that "bodily injury" includes physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition, but claims that Officer Rodriguez did not sustain any of these. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 1.07(a)(8) (Vernon 1994). Viewed in the light most favorable to the conviction, the evidence shows that appellant scratched Officer Rodriguez in her attempt to evade recapture and inflicted a wound. The officer's wound is readily apparent in a photograph the state introduced into evidence. The record also reflects that Rodriguez testified that he not only felt appellant scratching him, but that the scratch "hurt." Appellant's scratching Rodriguez with enough force to inflict a wound that bled and caused pain is legally sufficient evidence from which any rational fact finder could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant caused Officer Rodriguez bodily injury. We overrule appellant's sole point of error. Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.