MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00209-CR

Anthony Ray PERRYMAN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CR-4078

Honorable Raymond Angelini, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 24, 2010

REVERSED AND REMANDED

Appellant Anthony Ray Perryman was convicted by a jury for the offense of possessing a 

controlled substance in an amount of less than one gram and subsequently sentenced by the trial 

court to eleven years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of 

Criminal Justice. On appeal, Perryman contends that: (1) his sentence is illegal and void because 

the State failed to prove up the two non-state jail felonies necessary in order to punish Perryman 

as a habitual offender; and (2) he was denied constitutionally adequate notice of the State’s intent 
04-09-00209-CR

- 2 -

to further enhance his punishment. Because the trial court erred in enhancing Perryman’s 

punishment to a second-degree felony, we remand this matter to the trial court for further 

proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The State’s original indictment alleged two enhancements—both state jail felonies for 

possession of a controlled substance. On the day of trial, the State presented Perryman with 

notice of its intent to use two additional prior convictions in order to enhance Perryman’s 

punishment to a second-degree felony: (1) a 1977 felony conviction for voluntary manslaughter; 

and (2) the manufacturing/delivery of a controlled substance of less than one gram. Neither 

conviction was included in the original indictment for enhancement purposes. 

Perryman was convicted of possession of a controlled substance penalty group one, less 

than one gram, which is a state jail felony offense punishable under section 12.35 of the Texas 

Penal Code. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 481.115(b) (Vernon 2003). Following his 

conviction, Perryman entered a plea of true to the two enhancement allegations contained in the 

original indictment, but objected to the untimeliness of the two new enhancement allegations. 

The court overruled the objection, and Perryman subsequently entered a plea of true to the 

additional enhancement allegations. This appeal followed.

IMPROPER ENHANCEMENT OF SENTENCE

Perryman contends that the trial court improperly enhanced his sentence due to the 

State’s failure to prove the two non-state jail felonies required to enhance his punishment to a 

second-degree felony. In order to elevate a state jail felony punishable under section 12.35 to the 

punishment level for a second-degree felony under section 12.42, the State must prove the 

defendant was previously convicted of two felonies, and the second felony conviction must occur 
04-09-00209-CR

- 3 -

after the first felony conviction is final. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.42(a)(2) (Vernon 2003) 

(penalties for repeat and habitual felony offenders). 

In order to enhance a state jail felony conviction to a second-degree felony punishment

under section 12.42(a), the State must allege two sequential non-state jail felonies. Campbell v. 

State, 49 S.W.3d 874, 878 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (under section 12.42(a) of the Texas Penal 

Code, “the terms ‘felony’ and ’state jail felony’ are mutually exclusive”). The State’s original 

indictment alleged two state jail felonies. Thereafter, the State filed a notice of intent to use two 

prior convictions for enhancement of punishment, alleging two different prior convictions: one 

state jail felony, and one non-state jail felony conviction. The State alleged three prior state jail 

felony convictions, but only one non-state jail felony conviction. Therefore, Perryman’s offense 

is not punishable as a second-degree felony. Because the enhancement of Perryman’s 

punishment was improper, his sentence is void. See Ex parte Johnson, 697 S.W.2d 605, 607 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1985). 

In its brief, the State concedes that it lacked the requisite number of non-state jail felonies 

to enhance Perryman’s sentence to a second-degree felony. Accordingly, the trial court was 

bound to assess punishment in accordance with that of a third-degree felony. See TEX. PENAL 

CODE ANN. § 12.42(a)(1) (providing that state jail felony, with two prior state jail felonies 

convictions is punishable as a third-degree felony). Because the trial court erred in assessing 

Perryman’s punishment at the level of a second-degree felony, we remand this matter to the trial 

court for a new hearing on punishment.1

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH

 1

 Because Perryman’s range of punishment issue is dispositive in this matter, we need not address his remaining 

issue on appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.1 (requiring concise opinions addressing only those issues “necessary to 

find disposition of the appeal”).