Court Opinion

ID: 4045878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-28 23:58:40.460665+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:30:55.276368
License: Public Domain

ACCEPTED
                                                                                       05-14-01485-CR
                                                                             FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                                       DALLAS, TEXAS
                                                                                 3/25/2015 11:23:31 AM
                                                                                            LISA MATZ
                                                                                                CLERK

                                                         The State Waives Oral Argument

           NOS. 05-14-01485-CR & 05-14-01486-CRFILED IN
                                            5th COURT OF APPEALS
                                                 DALLAS, TEXAS
                 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 3/25/2015 11:23:31 AM
              FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS LISA     MATZ
                                                    Clerk
                             AT DALLAS

                      CHARDONDRA JONES,
                         APPELLANT

                                    vs.

                      THE STATE OF TEXAS,
                           APPELLEE

              On appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5
                           Dallas County, Texas
                 Cause Nos. F10-55473-L & F10-55726-L

                          STATE’S BRIEF

                                      Counsel of Record:

SUSAN HAWK                            KAREN R. WISE
CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY            ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS                  STATE BAR NO. 21810200
                                      FRANK CROWLEY COURTS BUILDING
                                      133 N. RIVERFRONT BLVD., LB-19
                                      DALLAS, TEXAS 75207-4399
                                      (214) 653-3637
                                      karen.wise@dallascounty.org

                      Attorneys for the State of Texas
                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... ii

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .............................................................................................. iii

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

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ........................................................................................... 2

ARGUMENT....................................................................................................................... 2

     RESPONSE TO POINT 1.............................................................................................. 2

          THE JUDGMENT ADJUDICATING GUILT IN CAUSE NO. F10-55473-
          L SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO ACCURATELY REFLECT THE
          SPECIFIC CONDITIONS   OF   COMMUNITY     SUPERVISION
          APPELLANT VIOLATED.

     RESPONSE TO POINT 2.............................................................................................. 2

          THE JUDGMENT ADJUDICATING GUILT IN CAUSE NO. F10-55726-
          L SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO ACCURATELY REFLECT THE
          SPECIFIC CONDITIONS   OF   COMMUNITY     SUPERVISION
          APPELLANT VIOLATED.

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

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

                                                                  ii
                                         INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Asberry v. State,
  813 S.W.2d 526 (Tex. App. – Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d) ................................................... 4

French v. State,
  830 S.W.2d 607 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) ........................................................................ 4

Rules

Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b)........................................................................................................ 4

                                                               iii
TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

       The State of Texas submits this brief in reply to the brief of Appellant.

                             STATEMENT OF THE CASE

       In Cause No. F10-55473-L, Appellant entered a guilty plea to aggravated

assault with a deadly weapon. (CR1: 23).1 On August 25, 2010, the trial court

found that the evidence substantiated Appellant’s guilt, but deferred adjudication,

placed Appellant on community supervision for 6 years, and assessed a fine of

$2500. (CR1: 23). On October 15, 2014, the court adjudicated Appellant’s guilt

and set punishment at 8 years’ confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal

Justice, Institutional Division. (CR1: 77). The court certified that Appellant has

the right to appeal. (CR1: 82). Appellant’s notice of appeal was timely filed.

(CR1: 88).

       In Cause No. F10-55726-L, Appellant entered a guilty plea to harassment of

a public servant. (CR2: 19). On August 25, 2010, the trial court found that the

evidence substantiated Appellant’s guilt, but deferred adjudication and placed

Appellant on community supervision for 6 years. (CR2: 19).

1
  The State will refer to the clerk’s record in Cause No. F10-55473-L as CR1, the clerk’s record
in Cause No. F10-55726-L as CR2, and the supplemental clerk’s record in Cause No. F10-
55726-L as CR3.
                                               1
      On October 15, 2014, the court adjudicated Appellant’s guilt and set

punishment at 8 years’ confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice,

Institutional Division. (CR2: 77). The court certified that Appellant has the right

to appeal. (CR2: 74). Appellant’s notice of appeal was timely filed. (CR2: 83).

                          SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

      The State agrees that the Judgments Adjudicating Guilt in Appellant’s cases

should be reformed to accurately reflect the conditions of community supervision

that the trial court found Appellant had violated.

                                   ARGUMENT

                            RESPONSE TO POINT 1

      THE JUDGMENT ADJUDICATING GUILT IN CAUSE NO.
      F10-55473-L SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO ACCURATELY
      REFLECT THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF COMMUNITY
      SUPERVISION APPELLANT VIOLATED.

                            RESPONSE TO POINT 2

      THE JUDGMENT ADJUDICATING GUILT IN CAUSE NO.
      F10-55726-L SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO ACCURATELY
      REFLECT THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF COMMUNITY
      SUPERVISION APPELLANT VIOLATED.

      In Points 1 and 2, Appellant claims that the Judgments Adjudicating Guilt in

her cases on appeal should be reformed to accurately reflect the conditions of
                                          2
community supervision she was found to have violated. The State agrees that the

Judgments Adjudicating Guilt should be modified as requested.

      The State’s Amended Motions to Revoke Probation or Proceed with an

Adjudication of Guilt, which were filed August 12, 2014, alleged that Appellant

violated conditions (a) (committing a new offense), (j) (paying community

supervision fees), (k) (paying Crime Stoppers fee), (l) (completing community

service hours), and (n) (paying urinalysis fee). (CR1: 70-71; CR3: 4-5). During

the adjudication hearing, the State noted that it was abandoning the financial

allegations, which would be conditions (j), (k), and (n). (RR3: 5). Appellant’s

open plea documents indicated that she would enter a plea of true to violations of

conditions (a) and (l). (CR1: 76; CR2: 76). At the hearing, Appellant entered a

plea of true to “the remaining allegations” in the State’s motion to adjudicate,

which would be conditions (a) and (l). (RR3: 5). The court stated, “Pursuant to

those pleas, in the revocation cases, the Court’s going to find you guilty, as

indicted.” (RR3: 20). Thus, the court found that Appellant violated conditions (a)

and (l), which were the only allegations to which Appellant pled true and the only

allegations remaining after the State abandoned the financial allegations.

      The Judgments Adjudicating Guilt state that Appellant “violated the terms

and conditions of community supervision as set out in the State’s ORIGINAL

Motion to Adjudicate Guilt as follows: See attached Motion to Adjudicate Guilt.”

                                         3
(CR1: 78; CR2: 78).       The State’s earlier motions to revoke probation, filed

4/1/2014, are attached to, and thus referenced in, the Judgments Adjudicating

Guilt.    (CR1: 77-80; CR2: 77-80).     Thus, the Judgments Adjudicating Guilt

reference and attach the wrong Motions to Adjudicate and imply that all conditions

in the Motions were violated.

         This Court has the authority to modify or reform a judgment to make the

record speak the truth when the matter has been called to its attention. Tex. R.

App. P. 43.2(b); French v. State, 830 S.W.2d 607, 609 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992);

Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 531 (Tex. App. – Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). This

Court should therefore modify the judgments in the instant cases to reflect that

Appellant violated conditions (a) and (l) of each “AMENDED Motion to

Adjudicate Guilt” and order that the Amended Motions to Adjudicate Guilt should

be attached to the Judgments Adjudicating Guilt. The judgments should then be

affirmed as modified.

                                         4
                                     PRAYER

      The State prays that this Honorable Court will modify the judgments as

requested and then affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.

                                                    Respectfully submitted,

                                                    _________________________
SUSAN HAWK                                          KAREN R. WISE
Criminal District Attorney                          Assistant District Attorney
Dallas County, Texas                                State Bar No. 21810200
                                                    Frank Crowley Courts Building
                                                    133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB-19
                                                    Dallas, Texas 75207-4399
                                                    (214) 653-3637
                                                    (214) 653-3643 fax

   CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND WORD-COUNT COMPLIANCE

      I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing brief was served on
Kathleen A. Walsh, attorney for Appellant, Dallas County Public Defender’s
Office, 133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB 2, Dallas, Texas 75207-4399, via hand
delivery, and by sending an electronic communication through eFileTexas.gov to
kathleen.walsh@dallascounty.org, on March 25, 2015. I further certify that this
document contains 1,078 words, inclusive of all contents.

                                                    _________________________
                                                    KAREN R. WISE

                                         5