Jesse Joe Mendoza, Jr. v. The State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed Jesse Joe Mendoza, Jr.'s conviction for indecency with a child by contact. The court held that the evidence, including the child victim's testimony, was legally sufficient under the Jackson v. Virginia standard and that the acquittal on the aggravated-sexual-assault charge did not require reversal based on allegedly inconsistent verdicts.

Holdings

1. The evidence was legally sufficient because, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Mendoza intentionally touched the anus of a child younger than seventeen with the intent to arouse or gratify his sexual desire.
2. The inconsistencies, conflicts, and lack of detail in the victim's testimony did not render the evidence legally insufficient because credibility determinations and the resolution of conflicting testimony are functions of the jury, not the reviewing court.
3. The allegedly inconsistent verdicts did not require reversal because Texas criminal law does not bar inconsistent verdicts, and the acquittal on aggravated sexual assault did not establish that the evidence supporting the indecency conviction was legally insufficient.

Questions Presented

1. Whether legally sufficient evidence supported Mendoza's conviction for indecency with a child by contact.
2. Whether inconsistencies and gaps in the child victim's testimony rendered the evidence legally insufficient.
3. Whether the jury's acquittal on aggravated sexual assault of a child and conviction on indecency with a child by contact constituted an impermissibly inconsistent verdict requiring reversal.

Disposition

affirmed