Daunevyn Lynn Snowdy v. State

AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed August 19, 2019.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00643-CR

DAUNEVYN LYNN SNOWDY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 068917

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Molberg

Daunevyn Lynn Snowdy appeals from his convictions and thirty year sentence for five counts of aggravated assault against a public servant brought in a single indictment. Snowdy challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support that the sharpened plastic spoon he brandished at jail officials was a deadly weapon. We affirm the trial court’s judgment, and because the issues are well-settled in law, we issue this memorandum opinion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

When reviewing the record for legal sufficiency, we consider the combined and cumulative force of all admitted evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether a jury was rationally justified in finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19 (1979); Johnson v. State, 509 S.W.3d 320, 322 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017).

The State had to prove Snowdy intentionally or knowingly threatened the jailers with imminent bodily injury and that he used or exhibited a deadly weapon during the commission of the assault. TEX. PEN. CODE § 22.01(a)(2); 22.02(a)(2). A deadly weapon is “anything manifestly designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting death or serious bodily injury; or anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.” TEX. PEN. CODE § 1.07(a)(17).

In determining whether an object is capable of causing serious bodily injury under section 1.07(a)(17)(B), we consider words and other threatening actions by the defendant, including the defendant’s proximity to the victim; the weapon’s ability to inflict serious bodily injury or death, including the size, shape, and sharpness of the weapon; and the manner in which the defendant used the weapon. See Johnson v. State, 509 S.W.3d 320, 323 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017) (collecting cases discussing factors). In Johnson, the deadly weapon was a standard butter knife used or exhibited during a convenience store robbery. Because of the defendant’s proximity to victims, his threats to harm, and victim testimony that the knife was capable of causing serious bodily injury, the Court of Criminal Appeals concluded the jury could have reasonably inferred it was capable of causing serious bodily injury or death. Id. at 324.

ANALYSIS

The State introduced the spoon and pictures of it at trial. Witnesses testified that Snowdy brandished the spoon while threatening the jailers with imminent bodily injury and continued to do so as they entered his cell due to his refusal to peacefully hand them his shank.1 He said he would kill the first person to come in his cell. No witness could say whether Snowdy sharpened the spoon’s handle, but our law does not require proof that the defendant himself crafted the shank. There is a video of parts of this incident showing jailers enter Snowdy’s cell and the aftermath as they work to confine him in a “restraining chair.” Corporal Terry Robbs testified the spoon could have gone through one’s neck, temple, or between ribs, if dispatched with enough force, any of which could have caused serious bodily injury. See TEX. PEN. CODE 1.07(a)(46). There was no contradicting evidence, and no meaningful cross-examination undermining Robbs’ statement.

Corporal Robbs’ testimony established several ways the sharpened spoon was capable of causing what we recognize as serious bodily injury. See TEX. PEN. CODE 1.07(a)(46). It was not clear that each of the five jailers Snowdy was charged with assaulting heard his threat, but this is no impediment to a conviction of assault by threat when there is some evidence of a threat being made. See Olivas v. State, 203 S.W.3d 341, 346-47, 349-51 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). The jailers perceived the threat Snowdy presented.

In the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude this is sufficient to show the shank was capable of causing at least serious bodily injury in the manner Snowdy used or intended to use it and thus is sufficient to support characterizing it as a deadly weapon. See Johnson, 509 S.W.3d at 323-24; Jackson, 443 U.S. at 318-19; TEX. PEN. CODE § 1.07(a)(17)(B).2

We overrule appellant’s sole issue. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/Ken Molberg/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 180643F.U05

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

DAUNEVYN LYNN SNOWDY, On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Appellant Court, Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 068917. No. 05-18-00643-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg.

Justices Myers and Carlyle participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered this 19th day of August, 2019.