Tarayshus Nijell Thompson v. State
12-15-00150-CR
| Tex. App. | Sep 2, 2015Background
- Appellant Tarayshus Thompson pled guilty to burglary of a habitation and received five years deferred adjudication community supervision under a plea agreement.
- After earlier modification of probation conditions in 2013, the State later filed a new application to proceed to final adjudication in 2015.
- At the 2015 revocation hearing Thompson pleaded "true" to the alleged probation violations (failures to report, pay urinalysis fees and other fees/costs, and to complete outpatient counseling); one allegation (employment) was abandoned.
- The trial court found the pleas were made freely, knowingly, and voluntarily after colloquy and written waivers, adjudicated guilt, and sentenced Thompson to fifteen years' confinement.
- Appellate counsel reviewed the record under Anders and concluded there were no non-frivolous grounds for reversal, sought leave to withdraw, and informed Thompson of his right to file a pro se brief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation of community supervision was supported | State: Thompson pleaded true to violations; plea alone suffices to support revocation | Thompson: (arguable) pleas may not have been knowing/voluntary; counsel ineffective; sentence excessive | Court: Revocation proper; pleas found knowing/voluntary; evidence sufficient |
| Whether due process required fuller admonitions at revocation plea | State: Article 26.13 formalities not fully applicable in revocation; written waivers suffice | Thompson: (arguable) Boykin-type protections required | Court: Colloquy + written waivers adequate; pleas voluntary |
| Whether imposed sentence exceeded lawful range | State: Offense is 2nd-degree felony; 2–20 years applies | Thompson: (arguable) sentence cruel/unusual or excessive | Court: 15-year sentence within statutory range; permitted at revocation |
| Whether appellate counsel provided effective assistance / whether Anders procedure appropriate | State: Counsel performed Anders review and followed procedure | Thompson: (arguable) counsel ineffective at trial or on appeal | Court: Record shows no non-frivolous claims; Anders filing appropriate; counsel may seek withdrawal |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedures when appellate counsel finds appeal frivolous)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969) (pleas must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (standard of review for revocation is abuse of discretion)
- Kniatt v. State, 206 S.W.3d 657 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (due-process considerations for pleas in revocation contexts)