IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-03-00237-CR

Leroy King,

                                                                      Appellant

 v.

The State of Texas,

                                                                      Appellee

From the 265th District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court # F03-00811-FR

      Appellant appeals his conviction for robbery.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.02(a) (Vernon 2003).  We will affirm.

      In Appellant’s sole issue, he contends that the evidence of his identity was legally insufficient.  Appellant contends that the victim’s testimony was not credible.  In reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence, however, we do not “assess the credibility of witnesses on each side.”  Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202, 205 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).  The State points to the following evidence.  The victim observed Appellant in good light and saw his face clearly.  The victim identified Appellant without any doubt near the scene of the crime and in court.  A police officer saw shock marks on the victim’s chest.  A witness to the robbery saw Appellant use a metal object against the victim, and saw Appellant get into a truck.  Appellant was found in that truck near the scene of the crime, with an electric cattle prod and the victim’s credit cards.  “[V]iewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” we hold that a “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”  See Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390, 401 (1993); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979); Ross v. State, 133 S.W.3d 618, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004).  Accordingly, we overrule Appellant’s issue.

      Having overruled Appellant’s issue, we affirm.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Reyna

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed December 22, 2004

Do not publish

[CR25]