Milton Pavon v. State

No. 01-16-00076-CR · Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas · May 11, 2017 · No. 01-16-00076-CR

Summary

The First Court of Appeals of Texas reviewed Milton Pavon's conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child and his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. The court held that the complainant's testimony, corroborating testimony and physical evidence, including anal injuries and DNA evidence concerning the complainant's ear, supported a rational finding that Pavon caused his sexual organ to contact the complainant's anus. The court overruled Pavon's sole issue and affirmed the judgment.

Court
Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas
Writing for the Court
Michael Massengale; Justice Brown; Justice Huddle
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
May 11, 2017
Docket number
01-16-00076-CR
Procedural posture
Pavon appealed his jury conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child, challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence.
Standard of review
The court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and determines whether a rational factfinder could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. The court measures the evidence against the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge, defers to the jury's resolution of conflicting inferences, and does not reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the factfinder.
Precedential value
Nonprecedential memorandum opinion; designated do not publish.
Parties
Milton Pavon v. The State of Texas
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedureappellate procedurestandard of reviewevidence

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate practice

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Pavon intentionally or knowingly caused his sexual organ to contact K.P.'s anus.

Holdings

  1. The evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Pavon caused his penis to contact K.P.'s anus.

Key quotations

In reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction, a court of appeals will determine whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the trier of fact was rationally justified in finding the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (at 4)
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, the evidence was legally sufficient for a rational jury to have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Pavon caused his penis to contact K.P.’s anus. (at 6)

Factual background

K.P., age 11, reported that Pavon touched her, pulled down her pants, and attempted to place his penis in her anus at his home. She promptly reported the incident to her mother and later gave a consistent account to a sexual-assault nurse examiner. The examination revealed anal tears consistent with her account, and Pavon's DNA was found on an ear swab in a manner consistent with K.P.'s statement that he had licked her ear. Pavon denied the assault and testified that K.P. had threatened to accuse him after he refused to let her ride his four-wheeler.

Procedural history

A Brazoria County grand jury indicted Pavon for aggravated sexual assault of a child. Following a jury trial, he was convicted and sentenced to 85 years in prison. The First District Court of Appeals reviewed his sole legal-sufficiency issue and affirmed the judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…