Adrien Delacorozo Rhodes v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Co Crim Ct at Law No 2 of Harris County (Majority Opinion )

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 14-11-00017-CR

Case Date: 12/01/2011

Plaintiff: Adrien Delacorozo Rhodes

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from Co Crim Ct at Law No 2 of Harris County (Majority Opinion )

Preview:Affirmed and Opinion filed December 1, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-11-00017-CR ADRIEN DELACOROZO RHODES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 2 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1595191

OPINION
Appellant, Adrien Delacorozo Rhodes, appeals her conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI). After her motion to recuse and other pre-trial motions were denied, appellant pleaded guilty. The trial judge then sentenced her to three days' confinement in jail and a $500 fine and ordered her driver's license suspended for one year. On appeal, appellant contends that the presiding judge of the administrative district abused his discretion by denying the motion to recuse the trial judge. We affirm.

Background Appellant was charged by information with misdemeanor DWI. She filed a

motion to recuse asserting that the impartiality of the trial judge, William Harmon of Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 2, might reasonably be questioned because he had a personal bias or prejudice against the Direct Intervention Using Voluntary Education Restitution and Treatment (DIVERT) Program created by the Harris County District Attorney's Office for first-time, misdemeanor DWI offenders. Judge Harmon referred action on the motion to Judge Olen Underwood, presiding judge of the Second Administrative Judicial Region. After an evidentiary hearing, Judge Underwood denied the motion to recuse.1 It is this ruling that appellant challenges on appeal. At the recusal hearing, Melissa Munoz, an assistant Harris County district attorney, testified that she was assigned to the DIVERT Program. She generally

explained the purpose and requirements of the program and stated that the district attorney's office makes the preliminary determination of whether a particular defendant is an acceptable candidate for the program. She further stated that appellant was eligible for entry into the program. Once a defendant is offered entry into the program, an agreement is "custom tailored" for that defendant. A sample agreement or "packet" was offered into evidence. In the packet, it is explained that the DIVERT Program was created under authority of section 76.011 of the Texas Government Code and that fees for the program are collected in accordance with section 102.012 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Tex. Crim. Proc. Code

Download 14-11-00017-cr.pdf