Butler, Billy Dean

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that the timing of the defendant’s threatening text messages to the State’s primary witness the week before his trial provided circumstantial evidence of authenticity
• recognizing that the appellant’s phone call to the text- message recipient “in between the [text] conversations” was a circumstance indicating his authorship of the text messages
• recognizing that text-message recipient’s testimony identifying Butler as the author of the texts implied, among other things, that “the content and context of the text messages convinced her that the messages were from [Butler]”
• holding that phone number or other identifying information, along with corroborating witness testimony, may “bridge the logical gap” and permit a proper inference that the purported author of an electronic communication actually sent the message
• recognizing that the content of the text messages—calling the State’s primary witness a “snitch” and threatening her the week before Butler’s trial—was consistent with Butler’s relationship with the witness and circumstantially linked him to the messages
• holding that a phone number or other identifying information, along with corroborating witness testimony, may “bridge the logical gap” and permit a proper inference that the purported author of an electronic communication actually sent the message

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).