scene showed that Cantu had staged the evidence. And undisputed physical evidence contradicted portions of Cantu’s theory that the shooting was accidental. Cantu stated and demonstrated on the video that he was pulling the gun away from Jackie’s head when it discharged, but the evidence showed the gun was fired with the muzzle of the gun placed against Jackie’s forehead. Dr. Pustilnik also explained how other pieces of physical evidence did not support the defensive theory that the gun accidentally discharged during a struggle. From the evidence presented, the jury could have rationally concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no struggle for the gun and that Cantu intentionally or knowingly caused Jackie’s death. See Howard v. State, 484 S.W.2d 927, 928 (Tex.Crim.App.1972) (<HOLDING>); see also Aldridge v. State, No.
holding evidence sufficient to support jurys verdict when physical evidence including evidence gun was fired from a distance greater than appellant told police was inconsistent with accidental discharge during a struggle holding that a motion denying summary judgment will not be reviewed on appeal from a jury verdict where sufficient evidence supports the jurys verdict holding that admission of hearsay constituted harmless error when there was more than sufficient other evidence in the record to support the verdict holding evidence sufficient to support murder conviction where appellants defensive theories of intentional or accidental selfinflicted wound occurring during struggle contradicted by physical evidence theory holding that some evidence was presented to support the jurys verdict that defendant breached contract and therefore trial court did not err in denying defendants motion for directed verdict or jnov