With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the same amount. The $34,005.91 sanctions award did not include the. $2,038.00 about which Aguilar complains. Absent any controverting evidence to show that the reduced amount is inaccurate, we cannot conclude the affidavit or accompanying invoices were inadmissible based on inaccuracy. See Bullet Concrete Materials, Inc, v. Texoga Techs. Corp., No. 09-11-00162-CV, 2012 WL 586676, at *3 (Tex. App.-Beaumont, Feb. 23, 2012, no pet.) (quoting Cochran, v. Wool Growers Cent. Storage Co., 140 Tex. 184, 166 S.W.2d 904, 908 (1942) (“ ‘[Tjestimony of an interested witness ... [that] is clear, direct, and positive, and free from contradiction, inaccuracies, and .circumstances tending to cast suspicion thereon, .... is taken as true, as a matter of law.’ ”));, see also Daniel, 981 S.W.3d at 232 (<HOLDING>). As to harm, Aguilar reviewed the affidavit

A: holding trial court free to evaluate credibility of witnesses
B: holding that it is trial courts function to evaluate witness credibility and weigh conflicting evidence
C: holding that it is function of trial court to judge witnesses credibility and to weigh conflicting evidence
D: recognizing that in any criminal trial the credibility of the prosecutions witnesses is central
A.