Brandon Lynn Pope v. State, 06-16-00128-CR

Brandon Lynn Pope was on deferred adjudication community supervision for aggravated sexual assault of a child and required to undergo polygraph testing as a condition of supervision.
The State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt alleging multiple supervision violations, including that Pope left the county without approval and failed to report from June 2012 to March 2016.
During a polygraph exam, examiner Andy Sheppard testified that, in the pretest phase, Pope admitted to viewing pornography and using alcohol and marijuana; those admissions formed the basis for additional alleged violations.
Pope pled true to the allegations about the polygraph admissions but pled not true to the new allegations based on those admissions; the trial court found them true and adjudicated guilt.
The trial court sentenced Pope to 39 years’ imprisonment and imposed a $2,000 fine; Pope appealed, arguing the trial court erred by admitting his polygraph-related statements.
The court noted Pope did not challenge all violation findings (specifically he did not challenge the county-leaving and failure-to-report violations), and those unchallenged violations alone are sufficient to support adjudication.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Pope)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Admissibility of statements made during polygraph exam	Trial court abused discretion by admitting statements from polygraph exam; polygraph evidence is unreliable per Leonard	Examiner testified only to pretest admissions, not polygraph results; pretest admissions are admissible in revocation proceedings	Court accepted that admissions during polygraph pretest are generally admissible but found adjudication supported by other unchallenged violations
Failure to warn that statements could be used against him	Pope contends statements should be excluded absent Miranda-type warning	State did not defend on that ground; issue was not preserved for appeal	Unpreserved; court declined to consider it
Sufficiency of evidence to adjudicate guilt	Implicit: admission-based findings challenged	State argued proof by preponderance is met if any violation proven	Because Pope did not challenge all findings, unchallenged violations (leaving county, failure to report) suffice to affirm adjudication
Standard of review for adjudication	N/A (appellant challenges trial court ruling)	Adjudication reviewed for abuse of discretion; State bears preponderance standard	Court applied abuse-of-discretion review and affirmed judgment

Leonard v. State, 385 S.W.3d 570 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (polygraph test results are unreliable and inadmissible over proper objection)
Harty v. State, 229 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2007) (admissions made during a polygraph examination are generally admissible in revocation proceedings)
Marcum v. State, 983 S.W.2d 762 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998) (same: party admissions during polygraph are admissible in revocation context)
Hammack v. State, 466 S.W.3d 302 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2015) (decision to adjudicate guilt reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Cobb v. State, 851 S.W.2d 871 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (State must prove supervision violation by preponderance of evidence)
Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (proof of a single violation is sufficient to support revocation)