Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi-Edinburg
appeal from the 98thDistrict Court of Travis County, Texas.
Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa
MEMORANDUM OPINION 
LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice
E.G.-C, a juvenile, appeals a judgment wherein a trial court
adjudicated him a delinquent for committing sexual assault.
See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §§ 51.03,
53.045(a) (West, Westlaw through Ch. 49 2017 R.S.); Tex.
Penal Code Ann. § 22.011 (West, Westlaw through Ch. 49
2017 R.S.). The trial court placed appellant on a determinate
sentence of probation for five years. In two issues,
appellant contends that: (1) the evidence was legally
insufficient to support a finding that he compelled D.M.,
 the complainant, to submit by the use
of physical force, threats, duress or violence; and (2) the
order imposing a determinate sentence of probation
erroneously provides that appellant signed a waiver of grand
jury approval. We affirm as modified.
petition, the State alleged that appellant, at the age of
sixteen years old, engaged in delinquent conduct by
committing an offense of sexual assault. See Tex.
Penal Code Ann. § 22.011. Specifically, the State
alleged that appellant intentionally and knowingly caused the
penetration of D.M.'s sexual organ, without her consent,
and compelled D.M. to submit and participate by the use of
physical force, threat, duress, and violence. Id.
Appellant waived his right to a trial by jury, and the case
proceeded to trial before the district court, sitting as a
juvenile court. The most relevant testimony regarding the
issues raised and our disposition came from: D.M.; D.M.'s
grandmother;and Angie Jones, a detective
in the child abuse unit of the police department.
who was fourteen years old at the time of the incident,
testified that she and appellant were friends during middle
school, and they had recently reconnected through Facebook.
On the day of the incident, D.M.'s grandmother drove D.M.
to a "Seven-Eleven" near appellant's apartment.
The two had planned to play video games. While on the couch
in appellant's apartment, appellant kissed D.M. She did
not want appellant kissing her, and she felt nervous and
scared. Then, appellant lead D.M. by her hand to his bedroom.
D.M. did not want appellant to hold her hand, and she was
"confused" and wondered "what was
happening." Once in appellant's bedroom, he shut the
door, put D.M. on his bed, and pulled down her blue jeans and
underwear. D.M. felt scared and "frozen." Appellant
then pulled his shorts down, got on top of her, and touched
D.M.'s stomach, leg and arm with his hands. Appellant
inserted his penis into D.M.'s vagina, and D.M. told
appellant to stop. D.M. recalled being "really, really
scared, " and she attempted to push appellant off of
her. D.M. was initially unable to push appellant off of her
because, according to D.M., he was "holding [her arms]
to the side, " preventing her from raising them to push
appellant away from her. D.M. "kept moving around trying
to, like, get him off." Eventually, D.M. "had
enough force to" push appellant off of her. She pulled
up her pants, grabbed her personal belongings, called her
grandmother to pick her up, and left appellant's
testified that when she picked up D.M., she appeared to be in
"shock, " would not make eye contact, and was
"quiet and different." After multiple inquires
about what was wrong, D.M. answered that she had been raped.
Grandmother turned the car back towards the apartment
complex. Upon returning, grandmother told the apartment
manager "what had happened, " and then she called
Jones sponsored most of the forensic evidence. She confirmed
that the shirt D.M. wore during the incident had gold sequins
on it. Photographs admitted as evidence showed a small gold
sequin on appellant's bed sheet. Jones performed a penile
swab of appellant, and a gold sequin was found on his penis.
trial court adjudicated that appellant was a delinquent for
committing sexual assault. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann.
§§ 51.03, 53.045(a); Tex. Penal Code Ann. §
22.011. It assessed a determinate sentence of probation for
five years. This appeal followed.
argues that there is legally insufficient evidence to prove
the State's allegation that appellant used physical
force, threats, duress, or violence to compel D.M. The State
responds that there is sufficient evidence to prove that
appellant used physical force, threats, duress, or violence
during the commission of the offense of sexual assault. Both
parties agree that appellant did not sign a waiver of grand
jury approval, but rather that the grand jury foreperson
signed a certificate of approval.
Sexual Assault Evidence
Standard of Review ...