State v. Ramon Escalante Jimenez
13-15-00368-CR
| Tex. App. | Oct 9, 2015Background
- Ramon Escalante Jimenez pled guilty in 2002 to possession of less than one gram of cocaine; sentence was suspended and he was placed on community supervision for four years.
- He was discharged from community supervision by operation of law on January 28, 2006 (no formal discharge order in the record).
- In May 2015 Jimenez filed a motion for judicial clemency under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.12 § 20(a), asking the court to set aside the conviction and dismiss the indictment based on Cuellar v. State.
- The State opposed, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant clemency so long after discharge; a hearing was held June 4, 2015, and the court took the matter under advisement.
- The trial court granted judicial clemency on July 28, 2015; the State timely appealed, arguing the clemency order is void because the court lacked jurisdiction nine years after discharge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Jimenez) | Held (Motion yet appealed) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to grant judicial clemency nine years after discharge from community supervision | Trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant § 20(a) judicial clemency once the ordinary discharge occurred and no statute revives continuing jurisdiction; the July 2015 order is void | Cuellar allows judicial clemency under § 20(a); no statutory time limit prevents court from considering clemency after discharge | Trial court granted clemency; State appeals arguing the order is void; lower-court precedent (Fielder, Shelton) supports State’s position that late clemency is beyond jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Cuellar v. State, 70 S.W.3d 815 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (explains § 20(a) contains ordinary discharge and a separate judicial-clemency mechanism and describes effects of clemency)
- State v. Fielder, 376 S.W.3d 784 (Tex. App.—Waco 2011) (trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant judicial clemency years after discharge)
- State v. Shelton, 396 S.W.3d 614 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2012) (interprets “at any time” in § 20(a) as applying to actions at discharge, rejects post-discharge clemency years later)
- State v. Patrick, 86 S.W.3d 592 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (discusses limits on continuing jurisdiction and that the Legislature must provide it if intended)
- Garcia v. Dial, 596 S.W.2d 524 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (lack of subject-matter or personal jurisdiction renders court acts void)
- Nix v. State, 65 S.W.3d 664 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (identifies lack of jurisdiction as a ground for a void judgment)