Christopher Robert Gear, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Tyler Court of Appeals and reinstated Gear's bench-trial conviction for attempted burglary of a habitation, holding that a rational fact finder could infer beyond a reasonable doubt that Gear intended to commit theft when he attempted to enter the complainant's home through a window he had just broken. Applying the Jackson v. Virginia legal-sufficiency standard, the court relied on Gear's interruption mid-entry and flight, his implausible and inconsistent statements, and his joblessness and lack of funds as cumulatively sufficient circumstantial evidence of specific intent, distinguishing Solis v. State where the defendant was not interrupted at the scene. Justice Cochran, joined by Justices Price and Johnson, dissented, arguing the evidence showed at most unlawful entry and lying rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt of intent to commit theft and accusing the majority of a speculative 'Don'cha know' standard; Justice Meyers also dissented.