Opinion
NO. 01-18-00213-CR
06-04-2019
AHMOD MCQUARTERS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 208th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1529089
MEMORANDUM OPINION
At appellant Ahmod McQuarters's criminal trial, Marisa Lopez identified him as the man clad in white who broke into her home carrying a rifle, hogtied her husband, and threatened to shoot two of her children if he was not given the location of the "safe." After watching home-surveillance video footage that showed a man matching McQuarters's description enter the home, hearing Marisa and her sister-in-law who had been living in the home during the robbery identify McQuarters as the man in white, and listening to McQuarters testify to his involvement in the break-in, the jury convicted McQuarters of aggravated robbery. McQuarters appeals, arguing that the evidence supporting his conviction was insufficient because inconsistencies in Marisa's testimony rendered it incredible. Because an appellate court does not weigh evidence or assess a witness's credibility, we presume that the jury resolved any inconsistencies in Marisa's testimony to support its guilty verdict. We therefore affirm.
Background
Early Halloween morning, Marisa Lopez was sleeping in her bedroom with her husband Barrera. Her three children were just across the hall in another bedroom, and her sister-in-law Dominique was in the other room at the end of the hall. Glass shattered against the tile floor downstairs around 3:00 a.m., and the noise awakened Marisa. She sat up in her bed and tried to wake Barrera when her bedroom door opened. She looked up. A man dressed in white with a red bandana covering his face walked in. He was carrying a rifle. Two other men followed.
The man in white instructed Marisa and her husband to remain in bed and demanded "the safe." Marisa and Barrera told the men that they did not have a safe. The man in white then directed the other men to tie up Barrera's hands and feet. The couple pleaded with the men not to harm them, telling them that they had three young children. Following the man in white's orders, the other men went to find the children. One of them went to the children's room, while the other went to Dominique's room.
Dominique was on the phone with the police when one of the men kicked down the door of the bathroom she locked herself in when she heard the break in. He aimed his gun at her, instructed her to stand up, and demanded to know who she was speaking with. Dominique was scared and could not bring herself to speak. The man then escorted her into Marisa's bedroom. When Dominique entered the room, she saw her brother Barrera hogtied on the bed, Marisa, and her two-year-old and five-year-old nephews—the third child successfully evaded detection.
The man in white, whose bandana had fallen from his face, aimed the gun at the children, gazed at Marisa and Barrera, and explained that he would shoot the boys if he was not shown the safe. The two parents begged for their boys' safety and insisted that they did not have a safe. Marisa offered the men whatever they wanted and handed them a ring from her hand.
While the intruders were ransacking the bedroom looking for the safe, Marisa noticed that the police had arrived and screamed, "The police are here." The intruders became frantic and demanded to know the best way out. After Marisa told them about the back door, the intruders fled. But the police had already set up a perimeter. During a subsequent search of the area around the home, police found and detained McQuarters, Mark Mason, Terrance Webber, and Robert Harris. The police found money and narcotics in McQuarters's backpack. They also found two firearms in a nearby ditch, one of which was a .22-caliber long rifle.
In a police interview, McQuarters admitted to his involvement in the robbery. Dominique later identified McQuarters in a photo array. And during his trial for aggravated robbery, Marisa and Dominique identified McQuarters as the man in white. The State also presented video footage from the home's surveillance system that captured images of the vehicle used in the robbery as well as the intruders who entered the home. The jury convicted McQuarters, and assessed his punishment as twenty-seven-and-a-half years in prison and a $2,500 fine.
Analysis
McQuarters appeals, arguing that the evidence supporting his aggravated-robbery conviction is insufficient. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view all evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt. Braughton v. State, 569 S.W.3d 592, 608 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). The essential elements of aggravated robbery are using or exhibiting a deadly weapon in the course of committing theft, while acting with intent to obtain or maintain control of property, and knowingly or intentionally threatening or placing another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death. TEX. PENAL CODE §§ 29.02(a), 29.03(a)(2).
McQuarters contends that Marisa's testimony was not credible and therefore the State failed to establish the above elements with sufficient evidence. McQuarters complains of Marisa's inconsistent testimony on the timing of the robbery, the number of men involved, how many of her children were brought into the bedroom, and what was taken from the house.
As an appellate court, we do not weigh the evidence or assess its credibility. Isassi v. State, 330 S.W.3d 633, 638 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010). We instead defer to the jury, whose responsibility as trier of fact is to resolve conflicts in testimony, balance the evidence, and "draw reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts." Id. (quoting Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9, 13 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007)). The jury heard testimony from Marisa and Dominique and saw them identify McQuarters as the man in white; viewed the home-surveillance footage that showed a man in all white matching McQuarters's appearance enter Marisa's home; and watched a recording of McQuarters's police interview that took place hours after his arrest and in which he, while still dressed in all white, admitted to his involvement in the robbery. We must presume that the jury resolved any inconsistencies in Marisa's testimony to support its guilt finding. We therefore conclude that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational trier of fact could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that McQuarters committed aggravated robbery. Accordingly, we overrule McQuarters's sole issue.
Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Richard Hightower
Justice Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Hightower. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).