Court Opinion

ID: 9406697
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-03 10:08:26.617459+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:32.606195
License: Public Domain

In the
        Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
         at Fort Worth
     ___________________________

          No. 02-22-00270-CR
     ___________________________

     KEDRIEN OFFORD, Appellant

                      V.

          THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 2
           Tarrant County, Texas
        Trial Court No. 1653299D

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Birdwell and Walker, JJ.
 Memorandum Opinion by Justice Birdwell
                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      The trial court convicted Appellant Kedrien Offord of three counts of

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and a single count of deadly conduct on his

open pleas of guilty and, after considering the presentence investigation report (PSI),

sentenced him to seven years’ confinement for each count, to be served concurrently.

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.02, 22.05.

      In a single point, Offord complains that the trial court’s consideration of the

PSI at punishment violated his confrontation rights under the Sixth Amendment.

However, he acknowledges that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held

otherwise, see Stringer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 42, 48 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010), 1 and that he

merely raises the argument “for a change or reversal in the law.” Bound by the court’s

pronouncement in Stringer, see Sell v. State, 488 S.W.3d 397, 399 (Tex. App.—Fort

Worth 2016, pet. ref’d), we overrule Offord’s sole point and affirm the trial court’s

judgment.

                                                      /s/ Wade Birdwell

                                                      Wade Birdwell
                                                      Justice

Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: June 29, 2023

      1
       In Stringer, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that “[w]hen the sentence is
determined by the judge, the information in a PSI is not subject to the Confrontation
Clause.” 309 S.W.3d at 48.

                                            2