1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 08- 057- CR
M I CH AE LDE AN GR AF AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 213TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppe l l antM i c hae l D ea n Gr afap pea l s t he t r i alco urt ’ s j udgm ent adj udi cat i ng hi m gui l t y ofi ndecen cy w i t h a chi l d and sent enci ng hi m t o t en y e a rs ’ i n c a rc e ra ti o n . W e w i l l a ffir m . In 2 0 0 5 , G r a f p le a d e d g u ilt y t o t h e o f f e n s e o f in d e c e n c y w i t h a c h ild y o u n g e r th a n s e v e n te e n y e a rs . P u rs u a n t to th e p l e a a g re e m e n t, th e tri a l c o u rt2 ... Becau se w e r evi ew t he deci si on t o adj udi cat e gui l t i n t he sam e m anner

a st h e re v o c a t io n o fre g u la rp r o b a t io n , w e u t iliz e t h e s a m e c a s e la w in c o n d u c ti n g o u r re v i e w . Ch a va n av. S tate , No. 02- 07- 00290

- CR, 2008 W L 255 338 9, at*2 n. 3 ( Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h, Jun e 2 6, 2008 , no p et . ) ( not d e s i g n a te d fo r p u b l i c a ti o n ). 2 def er r ed adj udi ca t i on ofG r af ’ s gui l t , pl ac ed hi m on c om m uni t y s upe rvi si on f or t en yea r s, an d a ss es se d a $1, 000
. 00 f i ne. The pl ea ag r e e m entco nt ai ned a
c o n d i ti o n tha t G raf w a s to n o t ha v e co n tac t w i th the i n j u red ch i l d

— h i s e i g h tyear - ol d st epdau ghteratt he t i m e of t he of f ense. Th e t r i al courtal so or der ed G r af , am ong o t herco ndi t i ons , t o notpos se ssa f i r ea r m orha v e an y
uns upe rvi se d c ont ac t s w i t h a ny m i norch i l dr en w hi l e on com m uni t y s upe rvi si on. O n S ept em ber25 , 20 07 , t he S t at e f i l ed a m ot i on t o pr oceed w i t h an
a d ju d ic a t io n o fg u i l t , a lle g in g t h a tG r a fh a d v io la t e d t h r e e c o n d it io n so fh is
com m uni t y su pervi si on. G r af ent er ed pl ea s of“ t r ue”t o t he al l ega t i onst hathe had co nt ac tw i t h t he i nj ur ed part y, t hath e h ad uns upe rvi se d c ont ac tw i t h a
m i norchi l d, and t hathe know i ngl y possessed a f i r ear m . I n hi s sol e poi nt , G r af
ar gue s t hatt he t r i alco urtab us ed i t s di sc r et i on byad j udi ca t i ng hi m gui l t y. A p p e l l a t e r e v i e w o f t h e d e c i s i o n t o a d j u d i c a t e g u i l t i s “ i n t he sam e
m ann e r ” a s r e v i e w o f t h e r e v o c a t i o n o f c o mmu n i t y s u p e rv i s i o n . T e x. Code C r i m . Pr oc. A nn. art . 42. 12, § 5( b) ( V er non Supp. 200 8)
. Appel l at e r evi ew of
a com m uni t y super vi si on r evocat i on i s l i m i t ed t o det er m i ni ng w het hert he t r i al
courtabused i t s di scr et i on, and w e exam i ne t he evi dence i n t he l i ght m ost f avor abl e t o t he t r i al court ’ s f i ndi ngs. 2 S e e Ca rdo n av. S tate , 665 S
. W . 2d 492,3 ... I n hi s w r i t t en pl ea , G r af pl ea ded t r ue “t o ea ch and ev ery a ctal l ege d”

by t he S t at e’ s pet i t i on t o r evoke com m uni t y super vi si on. I n open court , G r af pl ea ded t r ue t o a l l t hr eeal l ega t i ons . The t r i alco urt , how eve r , w hen an nounc i ng i t s r ul i ng, s pec i f i ca l l y f ound t r ue t he “a l l ega t i ons con t ai ned i n Par agr aph 1 and 2
. . . b a s e d u p o n [G ra f’s ]” p l e a . P a ra g ra p h th re e c o n ta i n e d t h e S t a t e ’s al l egat i on t hatG r af , i n vi ol at i on of hi s com m uni t y super vi si on con di t i ons, p o s s e s s e d a f i r e a r m. 3 493 –94 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1 9 8 4 ). U nde rt hi s st and ar d, pr oofby a pr epo nde r anc e o ft he evi den c e o f anyoneoft he al l ege d vi ol at i onsof
c o m m u n i t y s u p e r v i s i o n i ss u fficie n t to s u p p o rt a re v o c a ti o n o rd e r. Moore v. S tate , 6 0 5 S .W .2 d 9 2 4 , 9 2 6 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . [P a n e l O p .] 1 9 8 0 ); Sanch ezv. S tate , 603 S
. W .2 d 8 6 9 , 871 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. [ Pane l O p. ] 1980 ) . A pl ea of t r ue t o any al l eged vi ol at i on i s suf f i ci entt o sat i sf y t he S t at e’ s bur den as t o t hat
a l l e g a ti o n . S e e W

a tts v. S tate , 6 4 5 S .W .2 d 4 6 1 , 4 6 3 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 3 ); Co lev. S tate , 5 7 8 S .W .2 d 1 2 7 , 1 2 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 7 9 ). H e re, G raf p l e a d e d t r u e to allo f t h e v i o l a ti o n s o f his co m m u n i ty
su pervi si on al l ege d i n t he St at e’ s pet i t i on. 3 Thus , t he St at e m eti t s bur den , an d t he t r i al court di d not abuse i t s di scr et i on by basi ng i t s j udg m ent on G r af ’ s pl eas
o f tru e . T h e re fo re , w e o v e rru l e G ra f’ss o l e p o i n t a n d a f fi rm th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t. P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: HO LM A N , W A LKER, an d M C C O Y, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b)4

DEL I VERE D: Oct ob e r23, 2008