In Porras V

In Porras v. State , the court held that

A) the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to authorize a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Porras was guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted.
B) Porras's conviction should be reversed; the evidence of the alternative account of the shooting was substantial, such that the jury could not have found Porras guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
C) the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to convict Porras and, although the trial court erroneously failed to charge that a witness can be impeached by proof of a prior felony conviction, the error was harmless.
D) the trial court's failure to charge that a witness also may be impeached by proof that the witness has been convicted of a felony was prejudicial error, and Porras's conviction should be reversed.