Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Nigel Hays v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 05-19-00301-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; March 9, 2020; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Nigel Hays appeals the revocation of his community supervision and convictions for possession with intent to deliver gamma hydroxybutyrate and methamphetamine. Hays argues that the trial court's judgments inaccurately reflected his plea as “TRUE” to the State’s motions to revoke community supervision, asserting instead that he pleaded “NOT TRUE.” The State concurs with Hays’s position. The Court of Appeals recognizes its authority to correct the trial court's judgments to reflect the accurate plea, referencing applicable Texas case law and procedural rules. Hays was originally indicted for possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine (4 to 200 grams) and gamma hydroxybutyrate (400 grams or more). After pleading guilty, he was sentenced to 10 years of community supervision in both cases, with adjudication deferred for the gamma hydroxybutyrate charge. Subsequent violations led the State to move for revocation or adjudication of guilt, which the trial court granted, resulting in a 10-year prison sentence for the methamphetamine case and a 20-year sentence for the gamma hydroxybutyrate case. Despite the trial court's filings indicating a plea of “TRUE,” the record confirms Hays pleaded “NOT TRUE.” The appellate court modifies the judgments to reflect Hays’s plea accurately, affirming the modified judgments. The modifications clarify that, for case F-1730683-H, Hays's plea to the motion to revoke was “NOT TRUE,” and for case F-1730684-H, his plea to the motion to adjudicate was also “NOT TRUE.” The judgments are affirmed as modified.