 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Payne v. State8/29/2003
reject any of a witness's testimony."). Where there is conflicting evidence, the jury's verdict on such matters is generally regarded as conclusive. See VanZandt 932 S.W.2d at 96.
Therefore, the jury was free to believe either the eyewitnesses', the officers' or Jones's version of the facts. The jury chose to believe the eyewitnesses' and the officers' accounts of what they saw, and what they witnessed supports the jury's determination that Appellant was intoxicated on the day of the accident. Therefore, the evidence supporting guilt is not so obviously weak, nor does the contrary evidence so clearly outweigh the supporting evidence, as to render Appellant's conviction clearly wrong and manifestly unjust.
Appellant's sole issue is overruled.
Conclusion
Based upon our review of the record, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilt. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
(DO NOT PUBLISH)
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Texas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|