Anderson v. State

416 S.W.3d 884 (2013)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Anderson v. State

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
416 S.W.3d 884 (2013)

Facts

Rodney Anderson (defendant) and Timothy Sherber regularly sold methamphetamine to Jeffery Harmon, a paid informant for the Texas Department of Public Safety. One day, Harmon arranged to meet with Anderson and Sherber to buy methamphetamine, and Anderson and Sherber arrived in Sherber’s truck. Harmon approached the truck and asked for the drugs and then signaled to waiting police officers that the deal was underway. Officers approached Sherber and Anderson, and Sherber began to drive away. Officers fired at the truck, and Anderson was hit in the chin by a bullet. Sherber kept driving, hitting unmarked and marked police cars as he tried to flee and injuring one officer inside a police car. Anderson and Sherber were eventually caught and arrested. Police collected over eight grams of methamphetamine from the truck. Anderson was tried and convicted of possession with intent to deliver and aggravated assault on a public servant. He appealed, arguing that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain his aggravated-assault conviction because Sherber was driving the truck when it crashed into a police car and injured an officer inside. The first appellate court upheld the conviction, finding that Anderson could be held criminally liable under a conspiracy theory and instructing the jury that if Sherber committed the aggravated assault in furtherance of his conspiracy with Anderson to deliver a controlled substance, Anderson could be found criminally liable because he should have anticipated that police officers would face injury due to Sherber’s attempt to flee. Anderson argued that he had no reason to anticipate that police officers would be injured because he and Sherber were conducting a drug transaction between friends that typically proceeded peacefully and amicably.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Meyers, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 733,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 733,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 733,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership