David Owen Brooks v. State Texas

Appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction, the law of principals was erroneously submitted to the jury, extraneous offenses were unlawfully admitted in evidence, the admonitory charge concerning the extraneous offenses was improper, an oral confession was admitted in violation of Art. 38.22, V.A.C.C.P., a charge on circumstantial evidence should not have been submitted to the jury, and the trial court erroneously refused appellants requested charge on the law of accessories.