Elizabeth Silva Mendoza v. State
06-14-00227-CR
| Tex. Crim. App. | Apr 13, 2015Background
- Mendoza was placed on probation for three offenses: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, and attempted possession of a controlled substance.
- The State moved to adjudicate her guilt on those offenses after probation, and Mendoza entered pleas of true without a plea bargain.
- Judgments and sentences subsequently stated that the sentences were based on agreed pleas, despite the pleas being true without bargained terms.
- Appellant sought appellate correction to reflect the true procedural posture of pleas and avoid misstatement of a plea bargain.
- Texas Rules authorize the appellate court to reform judgments nunc pro tunc to reflect the record truth when evidence supports correction, even without trial-level objections.
- Authorities cited for reform include Ramirez v. State and Asberry v. State, supporting court power to modify judgments to speak the truth.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the judgments correctly reflect a plea bargain. | Mendoza | State | Judgments corrected to reflect true pleas; reform granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1991) (reformation authority to speak truth in judgments)
- Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26 (Tex.Crim.App.1993) (judgment reform for accurate plea bargaining statement)
- Ramirez v. State, 336 S.W.3d 846 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2011) (reformation when record supports correction)