State v. Wilson
2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1393
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2010Background
- In 1987 Wilson pleaded guilty to felony driving while intoxicated with two prior DWI convictions (1983, 1986).
- Trial court sentenced him to four years' probation after finding third-degree-felony DWI; probation later referenced as community supervision.
- Early in probation, the state sought revocation; capias issued; arrest occurred after more than 19 years.
- Wilson changed his name to Corrick and acquired a different Texas driver’s license number by the time of arrest.
- Wilson sought habeas corpus relief claiming the priors used for enhancement were not final judgments and thus illegal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 1983 DWI could be used to enhance to a felony when not final. | State argues prior non-final conviction may be used for enhancement. | Wilson contends 1983 non-final prior cannot enhance; finality required. | Yes; improper enhancement because 1983 conviction not final. |
| Whether habeas relief is available where the offense was a misdemeanor but enhanced to felony. | State contends no 'newly discovered' innocence; relief inappropriate. | Wilson relies on Sparks: post-conviction relief available when enhancement misapplied. | Habeas relief granted; conviction vacated. |
| Whether estoppel by plea prevents challenge to the validity of priors. | State asserts contract-like estoppel from plea benefits. | Wilson not estopped; Sparks permits relief despite plea. | Not estopped; relief proper under Sparks. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte Sparks, 206 S.W.3d 680 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (post-conviction relief available when offense was misdemeanor but enhanced)
- Ex parte Serrato, 3 S.W.3d 41 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (non-final DWI probation affecting finality for enhancement)
- Clopton v. State, 408 S.W.2d 112 (Tex.Crim.App.1966) (finality of probation-related convictions; not final until revoked)
- Rhodes v. State, 240 S.W.3d 882 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) (premature estoppel from plea leniency not applicable here)
- State v. Moore, 240 S.W.3d 248 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) (plea contracts presumed voluntary; post-conviction relief still possible)