Court Opinion

ID: 2919757
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 00:47:56.450994+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:08.528582
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-00-384-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
__________________________________________________________________

MATILDE ORTIZ,        Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,       Appellee.
__________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 103rd District Court of Cameron County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Castillo
Opinion by Justice Yañez

Matilde Ortiz appeals the revocation of her community supervision.  We affirm.
The State moved to revoke Ortiz's community supervision, alleging that she had violated several conditions of her
supervision by: being in possession of cocaine; failing to pay fines, court costs, supervision fees, and reimbursement for a
pre-sentence investigation; and failing to report her arrest for cocaine possession within ten days of the arrest.  Ortiz
pleaded true to the failure to report her arrest.  Ortiz challenges the revocation of her community supervision with three
points of error.
A trial court is vested with discretion to revoke an individual's community supervision.  Herrera v. State, 951 S.W.2d 197,
199 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1997, no pet.).  Violation of a single condition of community supervision is sufficient to
support a trial court's decision to revoke.  Id. (citing Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924, 925 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)).
Standing alone, a plea of true is sufficient to support the trial court's order of revocation.  Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127,
128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979).  
On appeal, Ortiz raises no challenge to her plea of true as to her failure to report her arrest to her community supervision
officer.  This plea is sufficient to support revocation.  The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

 
LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ
Justice

Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this the
12th day of July, 2001.