Arthur Michael Palacios v. the State of Texas, 12-21-00066-CR

Arthur Michael Palacios was indicted for burglary of a habitation (second-degree felony), pleaded guilty in an open plea, and received deferred adjudication/community supervision for ten years.
The State filed a motion to adjudicate; at the revocation hearing Palacios pleaded “true” to multiple supervision violations (missed random urinalyses, failure to report, failure to attend NA meetings, failure to complete Lifeskills).
The trial court found the violations true, revoked community supervision, and sentenced Palacios to 15 years’ imprisonment.
Palacios appealed raising two issues: (1) trial court abused discretion by not ordering a less-restrictive alternative (e.g., a Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facility (SAFPF)); and (2) the trial court improperly assessed a $25 time-payment fee and a $50 warrant fee.
The State conceded the time-payment fee was premature but contended the warrant fee was proper; the appellate court found two executed capiases in the record.
The court modified the judgment: struck the $25 time-payment fee (without prejudice to later assessment if unpaid after mandate), increased warrant fees to $100 (two $50 capias fees), and otherwise affirmed the judgment as modified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Palacios)	Held
Whether trial court abused discretion by not using a less-restrictive alternative (e.g., SAFPF) before revoking supervision	Revocation and imprisonment were within the court's broad discretion once violations proved; plea of "true" supports revocation	Court should have tailored sanctions and used intermediate sanction facility for substance-abuse issues instead of imprisonment	Overruled. Court held plea of true and multiple violations supported revocation and imprisonment; trial court has broad discretion to deny SAFPF placement
Whether time-payment fee ($25) and warrant fee ($50) were properly assessed	Conceded time-payment fee premature; warrant fee proper because arrest-related capiases were executed	Time-payment fee premature; warrant fee improper because record lacked warrants	Partially sustained. Time-payment fee deleted (without prejudice); court found two executed capiases and modified bill to $100 total warrant fees; judgment affirmed as modified

Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (standards for reviewing revocation of community supervision)
Cobb v. State, 851 S.W.2d 871 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (State must prove violation by preponderance)
Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (preponderance standard explained)
Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980) (single violation can support revocation)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (legal-sufficiency standard for convictions)
Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (evidence viewed in light most favorable to verdict)
Ex parte Tarver, 725 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (trial court discretion in probation decisions)
Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979) (a plea of "true" supports revocation)
Dulin v. State, 620 S.W.3d 129 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021) (pendency of appeal stops clock for time-payment fee)
Martinez v. State, 510 S.W.3d 206 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016) (warrant/capias fee authority)