In Barton v. State, 882 S.W.2d 456, 459 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1994, no. pet.), the court noted each conviction stands or falls on the cumulative effect of the evidence produced. See id. We look for reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the circumstantial evidence, and decide the sufficiency question based on the totality of the circumstances surrounding the entire incident. See id. The court do this with the clear conviction that, as an empirical matter, circumstantial evidence often has equal or even greater probative value than direct evidence. See Brown v. State, 911 S.W.2d 744, 745-46 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). In fact, circumstantial evidence is often as strong and conclusive as direct evidence, and may have equal and even greater weight than direct evidence.