Charles Blake Defore v. State
12-15-00075-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 8, 2015Background
- Appellant Charles Blake DeFore was indicted on two counts: Count I (manufacture/delivery of a controlled substance) and Count II (tampering with/fabricating physical evidence).
- On Feb. 22, 2013, the trial court deferred adjudication and placed DeFore on 10-year community supervision for both counts.
- The State filed motions to proceed with adjudication on Jan. 7, 2015; a consolidated hearing was held Feb. 13, 2015.
- At the hearing the court found the allegations true, expressly adjudicated guilt on Count I, but did not orally pronounce an adjudication of guilt on Count II.
- Despite no oral adjudication on Count II, the court imposed a 30-year confinement sentence in the judgment for Count II.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court adjudicated guilt on Count II before sentencing | DeFore: The trial court did not orally adjudicate Count II; sentencing without adjudication renders judgment void and appellate court lacks jurisdiction | State: (implicit) The judgment recites an adjudication and should be presumed regular | Record shows the court orally adjudicated Count I, found allegations "true," but did not expressly pronounce adjudication for Count II yet sentenced; appellant argues this affirmatively reflects error and jurisdictional defect |
Key Cases Cited
- Villela v. State, 564 S.W.2d 750 (Tex. Crim. App.) (absence of an express oral pronouncement complicates inference of adjudication)
- Breazeale v. State, 683 S.W.2d 446 (Tex. Crim. App.) (recitals in a judgment create a presumption of regularity but may be overcome if the record affirmatively shows error)
- Warren v. State, 784 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.]) (discusses dismissal where judgment is not final for lack of adjudication; reversed on other grounds)