it, even if the evidence is weak, impeached, contradicted, or unbelievable. Trevino v. State, 100 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Tex.Crim.App.2003). However, the evidence should not be so weak, contested, or incredible that it could not support such a finding by a rational jury. McKinney, 179 S.W.3d at 569. The mere fact that someone acts in response to provocation of another is insufficient to warrant a charge on sudden passion. Trevino, 100 S.W.3d at 241. Instead, the person’s mental state must render him incapable of rational thought and collected action. Kennedy v. State, 193 S.W.3d 645, 653-54 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2006, pet. ref'd). The defendant must show some evidence that he was under the immediate influence of sudden passion. Trevino, 100 S.W.3d at 241; see McKinney, 179 S.W.3d at 570 (<HOLDING>). D. Admission of Evidence We review a trial
holding that failure to record an assignment does not give rise to a cause of action holding that the victim pushing and yelling at the defendant just before the shooting was not an adequate cause to give rise to an immediate influence of sudden passion because the fight began earlier in the day holding that the first amendment does not by itself give rise to a cause of action for damages holding that passing the time of day with a customer in new york does not give rise to personal jurisdiction holding that before a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the victims character for violence there must be sufficient evidence to support a finding that the victim was the first aggressor and that once the defendant testified that he was attacked and cut by the victim without provocation before using the victims utility tool to stab the victim the defendant was clearly entitled to question the victim about past acts of violence reflected in court documents from the state of oregon