Wright v. State, 57230
| Decision Date | 16 January 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,No. 57230,57230,3 |
| Citation | 592 S.W.2d 604 |
| Parties | Tony Curtis WRIGHT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
James P. Finstrom, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry M. Wade, Dist. Atty., Maridell Templeton and Les S. Eubanks, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Before DOUGLAS and TOM G. DAVIS, JJ.
Appeal is taken from an order revoking probation. 1
On January 21, 1977, appellant pled guilty to a charge of burglary of a building. After hearing the evidence, and finding that it substantiated appellant's guilt, the trial court deferred further proceedings without entering an adjudication of guilt, and placed appellant on probation for a period of five years.
On May 19, 1977, the State filed a motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt. The trial court then revoked appellant's probation and entered an adjudication of guilt after finding that he had committed the offense of burglary of a habitation during his probationary term. On May 31, 1977, appellant's punishment was assessed at three years.
Initially, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction for burglary of a building. Specifically, he maintains that his judicial confession was improperly admitted into evidence in that he was not given an opportunity to object to the admission of the confession into evidence.
This contention is not supported by the record. The record reflects that after appellant pled guilty, the State introduced his judicial confession into evidence:
"MISS WILSON: State rests."
Appellant next challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at the May 19, 1977, hearing in which the trial court proceeded with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge of burglary of a building.
Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), supra, provides in part:
"
We recently held in Williams v. State, 592 S.W.2d 931 (Tex.Cr.App.1979) that under the terms of the above statute, no appeal may be taken from the hearing in which the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Homan v. Hughes, 69556
...Daniels v. State, 615 S.W.2d 771 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); Joseph v. State, 614 S.W.2d 164 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); Wright v. State, 592 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1980). Thus under the deferred adjudication procedure, if a defendant is unhappy with being granted deferred adjudication by the court he may mo......
-
Plante v. State
...original offense. Our courts have strictly upheld this statute. Williams v. State, 592 S.W.2d 931 (Tex.Crim.App.1979); Wright v. State, 592 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). Consequently, we have no authority to consider in this appeal whether there was sufficient evidence before the trial co......
-
Small v. State
...of guilt after a deferred adjudication. In fact, a plain reading of the germane section indicates just the opposite."); Wright v. State, 592 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1980); Earley v. State, 855 S.W.2d 260, 261-63 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1993), pet. dism'd, improvidently ......
-
Hargesheimer v. State
...also Olowosuko v. State, 826 S.W.2d 940 (Tex.Crim.App.1992); Ex Parte Hernandez, 705 S.W.2d 700 (Tex. Crim.App.1986); Wright v. State, 592 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Crim.App.1980); McIntyre v. State, 587 S.W.2d 413 (Tex.Crim. Although a defendant on deferred adjudication community supervision may not......