The State Requests Oral Argument 

if Appellant Requests Oral Argument. 

NOS. 06-14-00225-CR, 06-14-00226-CR,

& 06-14-00227-CR 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT TEXARKANA 

________________________ 

 

ELIZABETH MENDOZA, 

Appellant 

vs.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

________________________ 

On appeal from the Criminal District Court. No. 6 

of Dallas County, Texas 

Cause Nos. F12-61870-X, F13-34344-X, & F13-40734-X

________________________ 

 

STATE’S BRIEF

________________________

 

 Counsel of Record: 

SUSAN HAWK LARISSA T. ROEDER 

Criminal District Attorney Assistant District Attorney

Dallas County, Texas State Bar No. 24010357 

 133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB-19

 Dallas, Texas 75207-4399 

 (214) 653-3627 (Phone) 

 (214) 653-3643 (Fax) 

ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS 

ACCEPTED

06-14-00225-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

5/21/2015 3:28:54 PM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 FILED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 5/21/2015 3:28:54 PM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .....................................................................................................i

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ...............................................................................................ii

STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................................................... 1

STATEMENT OF FACTS.................................................................................................. 3

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT........................................................................................... 3

ARGUMENT....................................................................................................................... 3

Response to Appellant’s Sole Issue on Appeal................................................................ 3

THE TRIAL COURT’S WRITTEN JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE 

REFORMED TO CORRECTLY REFLECT THAT APPELLANT’S 

PLEAS OF TRUE WERE ENTERED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF 

PLEA BARGAIN AGREEMENTS......................................................................... 3

PRAYER ............................................................................................................................. 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND WORD-COUNT COMPLIANCE........................... 5
ii

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Abron v. State, 

997 S.W.2d 281 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, pet. ref’d) ................................................... 4

Asberry v. State, 

813 S.W.2d 526 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) ................................................... 4

Bigley v. State, 

865 S.W.2d 26 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).......................................................................... 4

Nolan v. State, 

39 S.W.3d 697 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.)..................................... 4
1

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: 

The State of Texas submits this brief in response to the brief of appellant, 

Elizabeth Mendoza.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

A grand jury issued an indictment in cause number F12-61870-X, charging 

appellant with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. (CR.1:13).1 On May 2, 

2013, appellant pleaded guilty and was placed on two (2) years’ deferred 

adjudication community supervision. (CR.1:35-36, 40-41). The State thereafter 

filed a motion to proceed to an adjudication of guilt. (CR.1:53-54). On November 

13, 2014, appellant entered a non-negotiated plea of true to the allegations in the 

State’s motion.2 (CR.1:60). The trial court entered judgment adjudicating guilt 

and assessed punishment at six (6) years’ imprisonment. (CR.1:56).

A grand jury issued an indictment in cause number F13-34344-X, charging 

appellant with possession of a controlled substance less than one gram. (CR.2:7). 

On July 2, 2014, appellant pleaded guilty to a lesser-included class A misdemeanor 

offense and, in accordance with a negotiated plea agreement, the trial court placed 

 

1 C.R.1 refers to the clerk’s record in cause number F12-61870-X (06-14-00225-CR); 

CR.2 refers to the clerk’s record in cause number F13-34344-X (06-14-00226-CR); and 

CR.3 refers to the clerk’s record in cause number F13-40734-X (06-14-00227-CR).

2

The clerk’s records on appeal do not contain the second half of any of appellant’s three 

plea agreements. The State has brought the matter to the attention of the clerk of the 

court, and has asked the District Clerk’s Office to supplement the clerk’s records on 

appeal with complete copies of appellant’s November 13, 2014, plea agreement. 
2

appellant on ten (10) months’ deferred adjudication community supervision. 

(CR.2:19-22). The State thereafter filed a motion to proceed to an adjudication of

guilt. (CR.2:36-37). On November 13, 2014, appellant entered a non-negotiated 

plea of true to the allegations in the State’s motion. (CR.2:44). The trial court 

entered judgment adjudicating guilt and assessed punishment at one (1) year 

confinement in the county jail. (CR.2:38-39).

A grand jury issued an indictment in cause number F13-40734-X, charging 

appellant with unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. (CR.3:11). On May 2, 2013, 

appellant pleaded guilty and on May 22, 2013, the trial court placed appellant on 

two (2) years’ deferred adjudication community supervision. (CR.3:25, 34-36). 

The State thereafter filed a motion to proceed to an adjudication of guilt. 

(CR.3:47-48). On November 13, 2014, appellant entered a non-negotiated plea of 

true to the allegations in the State’s motion. (CR.3:53). The trial court entered 

judgment adjudicating guilt and assessed punishment at ten (10) months in the 

state jail. (CR.3:50-51). 
3

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The State filed motions to revoke appellant’s deferred adjudication 

community supervision in three separate cases. Appellant entered a plea of true in 

each case without the benefit of a plea bargain agreement. The trial court 

adjudicated guilt and sentenced appellant to a term of confinement in each of the 

three cases. All three of the court’s written judgments incorrectly reflect that the 

sentences imposed were based on negotiated plea agreements. 

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

This Court should reform the written judgment in each of appellant’s cases 

to correctly reflect that appellant entered a plea of true in each case without the 

benefit of a plea bargain agreement. 

ARGUMENT

Response to Appellant’s Sole Issue on Appeal

THE TRIAL COURT’S WRITTEN JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE 

REFORMED TO CORRECTLY REFLECT THAT APPELLANT’S 

PLEAS OF TRUE WERE ENTERED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT 

OF PLEA BARGAIN AGREEMENTS.

The State agrees that the judgment in all three of appellant’s convictions 

should be reformed to correctly reflect the appellant entered her pleas of true 

without the benefit of a plea agreement.
4

Applicable Law

Where the record contains the necessary information to do so, the court on

appeal has the authority to modify incorrect judgments. Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); 

Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Abron v. State, 997 

S.W.2d 281, 282 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, pet. ref’d). “An appellate court has the 

power to correct and reform a trial court judgment ‘to make the record speak the 

truth when it has the necessary data and information to do so, or make any 

appropriate order as the law and nature of the case may require.’” Nolan v. State, 

39 S.W.3d 697, 698 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (quoting 

Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d)).

Application of Law to the Facts

The record in each of appellant’s cases reflect that appellant entered an 

“open plea” of true. The judgments, however, each incorrectly show a plea 

agreement to a term of confinement that matches the punishments actually imposed 

by the trial court. Because this Court has the information to do so, the State 

respectfully joins in appellant’s request that the judgment in each of her three cases 

should be modified to show appellant entered an “open plea” to the allegations in 

the State’s motions to proceed with an adjudication of guilt.
5

PRAYER

The State prays this Honorable Court will reform the judgments in cause 

numbers F12-61870-X (06-14-00225-CR), F13-34344-X (06-14-00226-CR); and 

F13-40734-X (06-14-00227-CR), and affirm as modified.

Respectfully submitted,

 

SUSAN HAWK LARISSA T. ROEDER

Criminal District Attorney Assistant District Attorney

State Bar No. 00791886 State Bar No. 24010357

Dallas County, Texas 133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB-19

Dallas, Texas 75207-4399

(214) 653-3627 (phone)

(214) 653-3643 (fax)

larissa.roeder@dallascounty.org

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND WORD-COUNT COMPLIANCE

A copy of this brief has been served on Bruce Anton, attorney for appellant, 

2311 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 250, Dallas, Texas 75201, via electronic mail at 

ba@sualaw.com on May 21, 2015. I further certify that this document contains 

1,069 words, inclusive of all contents.

Larissa T. Roeder