Court Opinion

ID: 9748869
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:16:14.228467+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:40.147404
License: Public Domain

KELLER, J.,
delivered a concurring opinion in which McCORMICK, P.J. and MANSFIELD, J., joined.
In Connolly v. State, 983 S.W.2d 738 (Tex.Crim.App.1999), we did not address the issue of whether the State is required to exercise due diligence in pursuing a motion to revoke probation. That case concerned only whether the defendant could, on appeal from the revocation of deferred adjudication, complain of the sufficiency of the evidence of the so-called defense. Id. at 741. We held that no appeal lies from the district court’s decision on that matter. Id. at 741.
This case also does not raise the issue of whether lack of due diligence is a valid defense to revocation. Whether the lack of due diligence constitutes a legitimate defense to revocation is an issue that deserves consideration in an appropriate case. Id. at 741 (Keller, J. concurring). I concur in the Court’s judgment.