From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baccus v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Mar 31, 2005
No. 05-04-01520-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 31, 2005)

Opinion

No. 05-04-01520-CR

Opinion Filed March 31, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 366-80109-00.

Affirmed as Modified.

Before Chief Justice THOMAS and Justices MOSELEY and MAZZANT.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Jasper Edward Baccus, III appeals from the revocation of his community supervision. Appellant waived a jury trial and entered a guilty plea to the charge of theft of property valued at $20,000 or more but less than $100,000. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 31.03(e)(5) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). The trial court assessed punishment at five years' confinement, probated for five years, and a $500 fine. Four years later, the State moved to revoke appellant's probation. Following a hearing, the trial court revoked appellant's probation and assessed punishment at two years' confinement. In a single point of error, appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation. We affirm. Appellate review of a probation revocation is limited to a determination of whether the trial court abused its discretion. We examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's findings. See Cardona v. State, 665 S.W.2d 492, 493 (Tex.Crim.App. 1984); Lee v. State, 952 S.W.2d 894, 897 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, no pet.) (en banc). The State must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the probationer violated the terms and conditions of his probation. See Cobb v. State, 851 S.W.2d 871, 874 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993). Proof of any one violation is sufficient to support revocation. See O'Neal v. State, 623 S.W.2d 660, 661 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1981); Lee, 952 S.W.2d at 900. One of the allegations in the motion to revoke was that appellant failed to report. While appellant contends that the evidence was too weak to support a revocation of his probation, his true complaint is that a Collin County probation officer, not one from Dallas County, testified to the violations, and appellant's probation had been transferred to Dallas County. No such objection was made at the revocation hearing. Failure to timely object waives error. See Tex.R.App.P. 33.1 (a). Having reviewed the record, we conclude the evidence is sufficient to support the probation revocation We resolve appellant's sole issue against him. The State asks that we modify the trial court's judgment to accurately reflect the trial judge's findings. The trial court's judgment reflects that appellant violated conditions "1-10" as set out in the motion to revoke; however, the State abandoned allegations one through four. The judgment therefore is incorrect. We have the power to modify incorrect judgments if we have the necessary information to do so. See Tex.R.App.P. 43.2(b); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd). Accordingly, we modify the section of the trial court's judgment entitled "Conditions of Community Supervision Violated (as set out in the Motion to Revoke)" to state "5-10".

As modified, we affirm the trial court's judgment.


Summaries of

Baccus v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Mar 31, 2005
No. 05-04-01520-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 31, 2005)
Case details for

Baccus v. State

Case Details

Full title:JASPER EDWARD BACCUS, III, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Mar 31, 2005

Citations

No. 05-04-01520-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 31, 2005)