Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the appellant was previously placed on deferred adjudication community supervision after pleading guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery. Following allegations of multiple violations of the terms of his supervision, the State moved to revoke it. During the hearing, the appellant admitted to these violations, leading the district court to revoke his supervision, adjudicate his guilt, and sentence him to five years of imprisonment for each count, with an additional $1,000 fine for one count. The appellant challenged the district court's decision, claiming an abuse of discretion in revoking his community supervision. However, the appellate court, referencing established case law, determined that decisions to adjudicate following such revocations are not subject to appeal. As the appellant did not assert any errors in the original convictions, the appellate court, with Chief Justice Marilyn Aboussie and Justices Kidd and Powers concurring, affirmed the district court's judgments. The ruling was filed on April 1, 1999, and is noted as not for publication.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Judgments in Absence of Conviction Errorssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: As Cantu did not present any errors concerning the convictions themselves, the appellate court affirmed the judgments.
Reasoning: Consequently, as Cantu did not present any errors concerning the convictions themselves, the court affirmed the judgments.
Appeal Limitations on Adjudication Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that under established case law, no appeal can be made regarding the decision to proceed to adjudication following a revocation of community supervision.
Reasoning: However, the court found that no appeal could be made regarding the decision to proceed to adjudication, referencing prior cases that establish this limitation.
Revocation of Deferred Adjudication Community Supervisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the decision to revoke Cantu's deferred adjudication community supervision was within its discretion due to admitted violations.
Reasoning: At the hearing, Cantu admitted to the violations, leading the district court to revoke his supervision, adjudicate guilt, and impose a five-year imprisonment sentence for each count, along with a $1,000 fine for one count.