From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Nov 24, 2014
No. 05-13-01193-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 24, 2014)

Opinion

No. 05-13-01193-CR

11-24-2014

CHRISTOPHER LAMONT JOHNSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F08-33900-H

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Evans, and Stoddart
Opinion by Justice Francis

Christopher Lamont Johnson appeals his conviction following the adjudication of his guilt for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. In a single issue, appellant contends the judgment should be modified to correctly reflect his plea to the motion to adjudicate. We modify the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt and affirm as modified.

The State's motion to adjudicate guilt alleged appellant violated eight conditions of community supervision, including condition (E) failing to give twenty-four hour notice of changes in home or employment address. At the hearing on the motion, appellant pleaded not true to violating condition (E) and true to the remaining allegations. The trial court found that appellant violated all the conditions alleged in the motion, granted the State's motion, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at imprisonment for twenty-five years.

In a single issue, appellant asks that we modify the judgment to reflect he pleaded not true to violating condition (E). The State agrees the judgment should be modified as appellant requests. We agree that the judgment adjudicating guilt incorrectly states appellant's plea to the motion to adjudicate was "true." We sustain appellant's issue.

We modify the judgment to show the plea to the motion to adjudicate was "Not True to Conditions (E); True to Conditions (B), (H), (J), (K), (L), (N), (Q)." See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd).

We note that the judgment also incorrectly shows "n/a" in the section regarding the deadly weapon finding. Appellant was indicted for, pleaded guilty to, and was convicted of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, a firearm. A firearm is a deadly weapon per se. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 1.07(17)(A) (West Supp. 2014). Accordingly, we modify the judgment adjudicating guilt to show the "findings on deadly weapon" is "yes, a firearm."

As modified, we affirm the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt. Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
131193F.U05

/Molly Francis/

MOLLY FRANCIS

JUSTICE

JUDGMENT

Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F08-33900-H).
Opinion delivered by Justice Francis, Justices Evans and Stoddart participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt is MODIFIED as follows:

The section entitled "Plea to Motion to Adjudicate" is modified to show "Not True Condition (E), True Conditions (B), (H), (J), (K), (L), (N), (Q)."

The section entitled "Findings on Deadly Weapon" is modified to show "Yes, a Firearm."

As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt.


Summaries of

Johnson v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Nov 24, 2014
No. 05-13-01193-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 24, 2014)
Case details for

Johnson v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER LAMONT JOHNSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Nov 24, 2014

Citations

No. 05-13-01193-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 24, 2014)