The 5th Court of Appeals decided JACOBY TAYLOR, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee, on July 7, 2017.
The Court issued a memorandum opinion affirming Appellant’s conviction for Aggravated Robbery.
The case was on appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court in Dallas County, Texas, as Trial Court Cause No. F07-52952-N.
From the court:
Appellant Jacoby Taylor appeals his conviction for the offense of aggravated robbery causing bodily injury while using or exhibiting a firearm. Appellant waived a jury trial and entered a negotiated guilty plea before the court. Pursuant to that plea agreement, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on probation for ten years and assessed a $2,000 fine. Subsequently, the State moved to proceed with an adjudication of guilt, claiming appellant had violated conditions of Community Supervision. At the revocation hearing, appellant pled true to the alleged probation violations. The trial court accepted appellant’s plea of true, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at ten years’ confinement. In two issues, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove he violated the conditions of his community supervision as alleged by the State.
Appellant pled true and judicially confessed and stipulated he violated two of the conditions of his community supervision by possessing a controlled substance greater than one gram and failing to complete a BIPP class. A plea of true to an allegation that a defendant has violated a condition of his community supervision is sufficient to support the revocation of community supervision and adjudicate guilt. Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469, 470 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979). Further, during the evidentiary hearing, the State called two police officers and a probation officer who testified to each of the two allegations contained in the motion. See Parker v. State, No. 05-13-01535-CR, 2014 WL 7497800, at *2 (Tex. App.—Dallas Dec. 29, 2014, no pet.)(not designated for publication) (citing Barfield v. State, 63 S.W.3d 446, 451 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (probation revocation hearings are unitary proceedings, which means the decision of the trial court is not fixed until it renders judgment on guilt and punishment after all the evidence and arguments have been heard)).
In this case, the trial court revoked appellant’s community supervision because he pled true to the State’s allegation that he committed an offense by possessing a controlled substance greater than one gram and failed to complete a BIPP class and because the State called witnesses during the evidentiary hearing who testified to the allegations contained in the motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt. Appellant’s written voluntary pleas of true to violating conditions of his community supervision and judicial confession and stipulation of evidence, and the evidence offered during the hearing, are sufficient to prove appellant violated the conditions of his community supervision. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding appellant guilty and assessing a ten year sentence. We overrule appellant’s issues.
