Opinion
No. 04-06-00167-CV.
Delivered and Filed: December 13, 2006.
From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2005-JUV-02107, Honorable Carmen Kelsey, Judge Presiding.
Opinion by: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice, Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice, Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice, Rebecca Simmons, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AFFIRMED
This is an appeal from a trial court's modification of a juvenile order of disposition. J.V. asserts the trial court abused its discretion when it committed him to the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) because the trial court's reasons do not justify the commitment. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
J.V. was charged with burglary of a habitation. Following a plea bargain, J.V. was adjudicated as having committed delinquent conduct and placed on probation for one year in the custody of his mother. The State filed an "Original Motion to Modify Disposition" and then later filed a "First Amended Motion to Modify Disposition," which forms the basis of this appeal. The motion alleged J.V. violated four conditions of his probation: (1) failure to report to his probation officer; (2) leaving home without permission; (3) failure to abide by his curfew; and (4) failure to attend school daily. J.V. pled true to violations (1) and (4) and after conducting a hearing the trial court committed J.V. to the TYC.
J.V. also pled true to violations (2) and (3). However, the dates of violations (2) and (3) were incorrect and, therefore, the trial court's decision was based on violations (1) and (4).
DISCUSSION
J.V. asserts the trial court's reasons for committing him to the TYC, instead of continuing his probation, did not justify the commitment. The trial court's reasons were as follows: (1) the probation department recommended commitment; (2) J.V. was on probation for a felony offense; (3) shortly after receiving probation, J.V. absconded from the jurisdiction of the court; and (4) J.V. refused to allow his mother to supervise him.
A trial court may modify its original order of disposition to commit a juvenile to the TYC if, after conducting a hearing, the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the child violated a reasonable and lawful order of the court. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 54.05(f) (Vernon Supp. 2006); In re T.W.K., 4 S.W.3d 790, 791 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1999, no pet.). Further, the court must state the reasons for modifying the disposition. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 54.05(i) (Vernon Supp. 2006). Juvenile courts have a great deal of discretion in determining the suitable disposition of children found to have engaged in delinquent conduct, particularly in hearings to modify a disposition. In re H.G., 993 S.W.2d 211, 213 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1999, no pet.). Absent an abuse of discretion, we will not disturb the trial court's findings. Id.
At the hearing, J.V. pled true to violating at least two conditions of his probation: failure to report to his probation officer and failure to attend school daily. The State recommended commitment to the TYC and it is not disputed that J.V. was on probation for burglary of a habitation, a felony. A predisposition report listing numerous offenses committed by J.V. was admitted into evidence.
Additionally, the record provides, and J.V. admits, he routinely left home without his mother's permission, sometimes for days at a time, refused direction and discipline, punctured his mother's car tires, and refused to attend school. Finally, J.V.'s mother told the court she called J.V.'s probation officer several times to report his behavior. We believe this evidence supports the trial court's finding that J.V. refused to allow his mother to supervise him.
J.V. argues the third reason given by the trial court, that he absconded from the jurisdiction of the court, is not supported by the record. However, we do not need to address this claim because the trial court's finding that he refused to allow his mother to supervise him is supported by the record.
Accordingly, we conclude the court was authorized and within its discretion to modify its previous disposition order and commit appellant to the TYC.
CONCLUSION
We overrule J.V.'s issue on appeal and affirm the trial court's judgment.