Opinion
No. 05-16-00307-CR
10-17-2016
KAMAURIS DEVONTEY JOHNSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F11-72084-U
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill
Opinion by Justice Whitehill
Kamauris Devontey Johnson appeals his conviction, following adjudication of his guilt, for aggravated sexual assault of a child. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion by proceeding to adjudication and finding him guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child. We affirm the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt.
Appellant waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021(a)(1)(B) (West Supp. 2015). Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court deferred adjudicating guilt, placed appellant on eight years' community supervision, and assessed a $2,000 fine. The State later moved to adjudicate appellant's guilt, alleging appellant violated eight conditions of his community supervision, including testing positive for marijuana, not paying fines and fees, failing to enroll in sex offender treatment, and failing to complete community service hours. Appellant pleaded true to all of the allegations in a hearing on the motion. The trial court granted the motion, adjudicated appellant guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years, and sentenced him to fifteen years' imprisonment.
Appellate review of an order revoking community supervision is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion. Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). An order revoking community supervision must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the greater weight of the credible evidence that would create a reasonable belief that the defendant has violated a condition of probation. Id. at 763-64. A finding of a single violation of community supervision is sufficient to support revocation. See Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924, 926 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980). Thus, in order to prevail on appeal, appellant must successfully challenge all the findings that support the revocation order. See Jones v. State, 571 S.W.2d 191, 193-94 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).
Appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion by proceeding to adjudication of guilt because his testimony clearly raised the defense of necessity for his marijuana use. The State responds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by adjudicating appellant's guilt because appellant pleaded true to violating eight conditions of community supervision.
The record shows appellant pleaded true to violating all of the conditions of community supervision alleged in the motion to adjudicate. A plea of true, standing alone, is sufficient to support revocation of community supervision. See Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979). During his testimony, appellant admitted he smoked marijuana, and stated he only used the marijuana to alleviate his pain from cerebral palsy. We conclude the evidence is sufficient to support the revocation of community supervision on this ground. Thus, we overrule appellant's sole issue on appeal.
We affirm the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt.
/Bill Whitehill/
BILL WHITEHILL
JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
160307F.U05
JUDGMENT
On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F11-72084-U.
Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Bridges and Lang-Miers participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment adjudicating guilt of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered October 17, 2016.