Opinion
No. 05-03-00114-CR.
Opinion Filed November 4, 2003. Do Not Publish. Tex.R.App.P. 47
Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 380-81000-99. AFFIRMED.
Before Justices MOSELEY, RICHTER, and FRANCIS.
OPINION
David Ray Peters waived a jury trial and entered an open guilty plea to possession of cocaine in an amount less than one gram. See Tex. Health Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(a), (b) (Vernon 2003). The trial court deferred adjudicating appellant's guilt and placed him on five years community supervision. Subsequently, the State moved to adjudicate guilt, alleging appellant violated the terms of his community supervision. At a hearing on the motion, appellant pleaded true to the allegations. The trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty, and sentenced him to twenty-three months in a state jail facility. Four months later, the trial court entered a nunc pro tunc judgment giving appellant credit for 240 days served. In one point of error, appellant claims he did not receive credit for all of the back time to which he is entitled. As a condition of community supervision, the trial court ordered appellant to participate in the Substance Abuse Felony Program (SAFP). Appellant entered SAFP on March 8, 2000 and was successfully discharged on December 4, 2000. Appellant asserts he is entitled to credit for the time he spent in SAFP. The State responds appellant has already received all of the credit to which he was entitled. We agree with the State. In criminal cases, the trial judge gives credit on a defendant's sentence for the time he has spent in jail on said cause, other than confinement served as a condition of community supervision, from the time of defendant's arrest and confinement until his sentence by the trial court. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03, § 2(a) (Vernon Supp. 2003); see also Ex parte Harris, 946 S.W.2d 79, 81 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997). Appellant is not entitled to back time credit for the time he spent in SAFP as a condition of community supervision. We overrule appellant's sole point of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.