Appeal from the 268th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas
Trial Court Case Nos. 14-DCR-067551 and 14-DCR-067552
consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and
found Juan Jose Sanchez guilty of two separate offenses of
fraudulent use of identifying information, and assessed his
punishment at two years' confinement, probated for two
years. See Tex. Penal Code § 32.51(b)(1). On
appeal, Sanchez contends that the State failed to introduce
legally sufficient evidence to permit the jury to find beyond
a reasonable doubt that he intended to defraud or harm the
complainant. We affirm.
separate indictments, the State alleged that Sanchez used the
identifying information of Kim Pham without her consent.
Sanchez was tried for both of these related offenses in a
Pham, her husband, Thai Pham, and Detective R. Fields of the
Fort Bend County Sherriff's Office testified at trial.
There were no other witnesses.
2014, the Phams discovered two checks fraudulently had been
written on their joint checking account. The first check,
number 125, was dated August 27 and negotiated on September
8. The second check, number 120, also was dated August 27,
but it was negotiated on September 9. Both checks were
written in the amount of $375, made out to Juan Jose Sanchez
as the payee, signed in Kim's name as the drawer, and
included a handwritten note indicating that the checks were
for "Gutter Repair."
testified that the checks were negotiated at different bank
branches. The bank identified one of its account holders,
Sanchez, as the person who negotiated the checks. Fields
confirmed Sanchez's identity and his involvement via his
driver's license and bank surveillance photos. Fields
concluded that the circumstances-two checks written out of
sequence but dated the same day and written for the same
Thai Pham denied writing the checks. They testified that they
did not have any work done on their gutters or on any
property they owned during the relevant timeframe. They did
not recognize Sanchez and had not authorized him to work on
their property. The check numbers that they used during that
period were much higher than numbers 120 and 125. Thai said
that their checks were numbered in the 300s, 400s, or 500s;
Kim said that their checks were at least in the 400s. Kim
never gave Sanchez permission to use her checking account.
contends that the State did not prove his guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt because it failed to adduce evidence that he
intended to defraud or harm Kim Pham. In particular, Sanchez
contends that "the State offered no evidence that
Pham's checks were stolen and offered no evidence as to
how" the checks came into Sanchez's possession.
A. Standard of review
apply the legal standard for evidentiary sufficiency stated
in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979).
Gear v. State, 340 S.W.3d 743, 746 (Tex. Crim. App.
2011); Pena v. State, 441 S.W.3d 635, 640 (Tex.
App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, pet. ref'd). Under this
standard, we "must consider all of the evidence in the
light most favorable to the verdict and determine whether,
based on that evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom, a
rational fact finder could have found the essential elements
of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Gear,
340 S.W.3d at 746. We cannot substitute our judgment for that
of the jury by reevaluating the weight or ...