testimony from her grandparent, the impact and trauma the sexual assault had on the victim. We have already referenced the multiple crimes committed by Bain and the testimony about their impact on those victims and their families, as well as Bain’s own admissions about his actions. Although the State addressed the impact of the sexual attack on the girl, that aspect of the testimony was not emphasized in closing argument. Under these circumstances, and after our review of the entire record, we conclude the erroneous admission of brief testimony about the impact of Bain’s actions on the child was not of such a nature as to affect the jury’s assessment of punishment. See Lindsay v. State, 102 S.W.3d 223, 229 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.], 2003, pet. filed); Boston, 965 S.W.2d at 550 (<HOLDING>). We affirm the judgment. 1 . The Texas Court
holding that the admission of a family photo was harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence in support of the conviction holding although admission of victim impact testimony was error it was harmless in light of strong evidence against defendant holding that in light of strong evidence of guilt tainted evidence was harmless under brecht holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record