restricts the State’s theories of liability, and adequately describes the particular offense for which the defendant is tried.” Id. The jury is the trier of fact, and is the ultimate authority on the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony. See Tex.Code CRiM. Proc. Ann. Art. 38.04 (Vernon 1979); Penagraph v. State, 623 S.W.2d 341, 343 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1981). It is for the jury as trier of fact to resolve any conflicts and inconsistencies in the evidence. Bowden v. State, 628 S.W.2d 782, 784 (Tex.Crim.App.1982). Even where there is no conflict, the jury may give no weight to some evidence, and thereby reject part or all of a witness’s testimony. See Beardsley v. State, 738 S.W.2d 681, 684 (Tex.Crim.App.1987); see also Chambers, 805 S.W.2d at 461 (<HOLDING>). Because it is the province of the jury to
holding jury is sole judge of witness credibility and may believe some witnesses and refuse to believe others holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony holding jury as judge of credibility may believe all some or none of the testimony holding mere conflict in testimony does not render evidence insufficient to support verdict because it is with province of fact finder to determine weight to be given to testimony and to believe all part or none of evidence holding that this court will not disturb factfinders witness credibility determinations where evidence is conflicting factfinder may believe all part or none of the testimony