Court Opinion

ID: 9891308
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-18 08:09:10.696366+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.682928
License: Public Domain

In the
              Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                   No. 06-23-00110-CR

          JACOB WAYNE WILSON, Appellant

                            V.

           THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

          On Appeal from the 6th District Court
                Lamar County, Texas
                Trial Court No. 29791

      Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
      Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Stevens
                                    MEMORANDUM OPINION

        In his sole point of error on appeal, Jacob Wayne Wilson seeks modification of the trial

court’s judgment revoking his community supervision by changing the fine from $500.00 to

$400.00. Because this point of error lacks merit, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

I.      Background

        After having been charged with possession of a controlled substance, Wilson entered into

a plea agreement with the State whereby he would be sentenced to two years’ incarceration

suspended in favor of four years’ community supervision. Wilson also agreed to pay a $400.00

fine. The trial court accepted the plea agreement, sentenced Wilson, and suspended the sentence

and the fine in accordance with the agreement.1

        Later, the State filed a motion to revoke Wilson’s community supervision. Wilson pled

true to the motion and was sentenced to twenty months’ incarceration.                       The judgment of

revocation did not impose a fine.2

II.     Wilson’s Sole Point of Error is Without Merit

        On appeal, Wilson complains that the trial court abused its discretion by assessing a

$500.00 fine in the revocation judgment because the original fine imposed was $400.00. See

Coffey v. State, 979 S.W.2d 326, 329 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (fine imposed at original plea

proceeding is appropriately included in revocation judgment). Although the trial court originally

1
 The judgment incorrectly stated that the terms of the plea agreement included a $500.00 fine; however, the
judgment imposed a $400.00 fine.
2
 The judgment incorrectly listed the “Original Punishment Assessed” as two years’ incarceration probated for four
years and a $500.00 fine.
                                                       2
imposed a $400.00 fine and could have appropriately included that fine in the revocation

judgment, it chose not to impose any fine. We, therefore, conclude that Wilson’s sole point of

error lacks merit.

III.   Conclusion

       We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

                                               Scott E. Stevens
                                               Chief Justice

Date Submitted:       October 9, 2023
Date Decided:         October 12, 2023

Do Not Publish

                                                  3