Perry Como Denby, Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court reversed Perry Como Denby's felony theft conviction, holding that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law because no rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; it affirmed that the standard of appellate review for sufficiency of evidence is identical for circumstantial and direct evidence and is de novo. Justice McCormick concurred, emphasizing that the exclusion of reasonable hypotheses is not part of the standard.