Contreras v. State
| Decision Date | 09 February 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 1006-82,1006-82 |
| Citation | 645 S.W.2d 298 |
| Parties | Nelson R. CONTRERAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
John R. Martinez, Gustavo E. Gonzales, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Molly Meredith and James T. Jacks, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, Robert Huttash, State's Atty. and Alfred Walker, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Before the court en banc.
OPINION ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
This cause is before us on appellant's petition for discretionary review, the Court of Appeals having affirmed his conviction for aggravated assault after a Motion to Proceed to Adjudication was found to be true by the trial court.
However, in Williams v. State, 592 S.W.2d 931 (Tex.Cr.App.1979), we held that under the terms of Article 42.12, § 3d(b), V.A.C.C.P., no appeal may be taken from the hearing in which the trial court determines to proceed with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge. See Wright v. State, 592 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1980) and Daniels v. State, 615 S.W.2d 771 (Tex.Cr.App.1981). Accordingly, the purported appeal should have never been entertained by the Court of Appeals. Therefore, appellant's petition for discretionary review is refused.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fielding v. State
...Thus, in ruling on a preliminary motion, our court struck appellant's first five grounds of error. See Contreras v. State, 645 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Crim.App.1983). III. Cruel and Unusual In his sixth ground of error, appellant contends that his change in status from deferred adjudication to sixt......
-
Homan v. Hughes, 69556
...of guilt on the original charge, pursuant to the provisions in Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), V.A.C.C.P. See also Contreras v. State, 645 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Cr.App.1983); Richardson v. State, 617 S.W.2d 267 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); Daniels v. State, 615 S.W.2d 771 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); Joseph v. State, 614 S.......
-
Johnson v. State
...42.12, sec. 3d(b) (Vernon 1979). Johnson's grounds of error one, two, three and five are therefore, not reviewable. Contreras v. State, 645 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Crim.App.1983). The error found in the supplemental grounds of error would therefore be harmless and not cause for reversal, in relatio......
-
Hogans v. State
..."decision"); Daniels, 615 S.W.2d 771, 771 (Tex.Crim.App.1981)(sufficiency of the evidence claim: "hearing"); Contreras v. State, 645 S.W.2d 298, 298 (Tex.Crim.App.1983)(refusing petition for discretionary review with summary statement that court of appeals did not have jurisdiction over the......