State v. Davis, 335 S.W.3d 252

Davis pled guilty to burglary with intent to commit aggravated assault; trial court imposed 15-year sentence on Sept 14, 2009.
On Oct 6, 2009, Davis filed a motion for reconsideration or reduction of sentence.
Trial court granted the motion and reduced the sentence to 12 years on Oct 16, 2009; a second judgment reflecting 12 years followed on Oct 19, 2009.
State gave notice of appeal and contends the motion was untimely and not a motion for new trial or arrest of judgment.
Court held the motion was timely within 30 days and functionally equivalent to a motion for new trial, giving the court plenary power to modify.
Issue of voidness raised by State was rejected; modification did not render the judgment void and due-process concerns were addressed but not fatal to the ruling.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in modifying the sentence after punishment began.	State contends the Davis motion was untimely and not a new trial.	Davis argues the motion is timely and equivalent to a motion for new trial.	Motion timely and equivalent to new trial; court had authority to modify.

State v. Aguilera, 165 S.W.3d 695 (Tex.Crim.App.2005) (plenary power to modify sentence within 30 days of sentencing)
State v. Savage, 933 S.W.2d 497 (Tex.Crim.App.1996) (functional equivalence of judgment non obstante veredicto to new trial)
State v. Evans, 843 S.W.2d 576 (Tex.Crim.App.1992) (labels ignored; motion effectively a new trial)
Ex parte Madding, 70 S.W.3d 131 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (absence of defendant at modification not void if due process remains)
Padilla v. LaFrance, 907 S.W.2d 454 (Tex.1995) (motion for reconsideration equivalent to modifying judgment)
Dayco Products, Inc. v. Ebrahim, 10 S.W.3d 80 (Tex.App.-Tyler 1999) (motion for reconsideration = equivalent to new trial)
IPM Products Corp. v. Motor Parkway Realty, 960 S.W.2d 879 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1997) (reconsideration and flexibility in post-judgment motions)