Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Warren v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler

May 23, 2018

COURTNEY DANIEL WARREN, Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

          Appeal from the 159th District Court of Angelina County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2015-0328)

          Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          GREG NEELEY JUSTICE

         Courtney Daniel Warren appeals his sentence following the revocation of his community supervision. In one issue, Appellant argues the trial court erred by failing to award him credit towards his sentence for the time he spent in a substance abuse felony punishment facility (SAFP). We modify and affirm as modified.

         Background

         In June 2015, Appellant pleaded "guilty" to eight counts of theft of property totaling less than $1, 500, enhanced. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Appellant was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for ten years on Counts II-VIII.[1] One of the conditions of Appellant's community supervision required that he successfully serve a term of confinement and treatment in a SAFP facility. The record indicates Appellant entered a SAFP facility on March 28, 2015 and was released on February 10, 2016. Appellant was then transferred to a Residential Transitional Treatment Program and released upon completion on May 10, 2016.

         In August 2016, the State filed a motion to adjudicate or revoke, which requested the trial court revoke Appellant's community supervision. Appellant pleaded "true" to three of the State's allegations. Following a hearing, the trial court found the allegations in the State's motion to be "true, " revoked Appellant's community supervision, and sentenced him to imprisonment for ten years, with credit for time served. This appeal followed.

         Time Credit

         In his sole issue, Appellant complains that the trial court erred by not crediting his sentence with the time he spent in the halfway house. The State concedes error.

         Successful completion of the inpatient portion of the SAFP program entitles a defendant to credit towards his sentence for time spent in the facility. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42A.755(d) (West 2018) (on revocation, trial court shall credit to defendant time served as a condition of community supervision in a substance abuse felony punishment facility if defendant successfully completed the treatment program in that facility); Deveraux v. State, Nos. 12-13-00284-CR, 12-13-00285-CR, 2014 WL 977475, at *3 (Tex. App.-Tyler Mar. 12, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (a defendant is not required to complete a subsequent program to receive credit on sentence for time served in a SAFP facility). In this case, the record indicates that Appellant completed the inpatient portion of the SAFP program; thus, we sustain Appellant's sole issue and conclude that he should receive credit for the time he spent in SAFP. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42A.755(d); Deveraux, 2014 WL 977475, at *3.

         We have the authority to modify a judgment to make the record speak the truth when we have the necessary data and information to do so. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); see also Ingram v. State, 261 S.W.3d 749, 754 (Tex. App.-Tyler 2008, no pet.); Davis v. State, 323 S.W.3d 190, 198 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2008, pet. ref'd). In this case, the record indicates that Appellant entered SAFP on March 28, 2015. Appellant testified, without objection, that he was transferred to a halfway house on February 10, 2016, for three months as part of the SAFP treatment plan. Appellant was not credited for February 10, 2016 through May 10, 2016. However, the record supports the conclusion that Appellant is entitled to credit for time spent in SAFP from February 10 to May 10. Because we have the necessary information, we conclude that the trial court's judgment should be modified to reflect credit for the time Appellant served in a SAFP facility, which, by our calculation, is another ninety days in addition to the days already credited to his sentence. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b).

         Disposition

         Having sustained Appellant's sole issue, we modify the trial court's judgment of adjudication by adding the date range "From 02/10/2016 TO 05/10/2016" in the "Time Credited" column between the lines that state "From 03/28/2015 TO 2/10/2016" and "From 06/05/2017 to 11/07/2017[.]" We aff ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.