Terrell Shamar Williams v. State
02-15-00299-CR
| Tex. App. | Aug 25, 2016Background
- In 2008 Williams received ten years’ deferred-adjudication community supervision for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and engaging in organized crime.
- In April 2015 the State filed fourth petitions to adjudicate based on an alleged new offense: evading arrest or detention with a vehicle.
- At the hearing Williams pleaded true to the revocation allegations and guilty to the evading offense; there was no plea-agreement on punishment.
- The trial court adjudicated Williams guilty on the 2008 offenses and convicted him of evading, sentencing him to 30 years on each adjudicated offense and 10 years for evading.
- Williams appeals on two grounds: (1) denial of a continuance (motion not in writing or sworn), and (2) that a miscommunication during plea negotiations deprived him of the opportunity to accept the State’s seven-year plea offer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of continuance | Williams: trial court abused discretion by denying continuance. | State: motion was neither written nor sworn; not preserved for review. | Affirmed—unpreserved because motion not written/sworn. |
| Plea-offer misunderstanding | Williams: his remarks were mistakenly construed as rejecting the State’s 7-year offer; he intended to keep it under advisement and was deprived of the bargain. | State/Trial Court: objective statements showed rejection; prosecutor reasonably withdrew offer after perceived rejection. | Affirmed—objective manifestations showed rejection; subjective intent irrelevant. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (unsworn, unwritten continuance motion does not preserve error)
- Ex parte Cox, 482 S.W.3d 112 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (plea bargains governed by contract principles)
- Ex parte Adkins, 767 S.W.2d 809 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (plea bargains should not be strictly enforced to the detriment of due process)
- Anderson v. State, 268 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2008), rev’d, 301 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (discussed by appellant; cited regarding continuance preservation)