Tranquilino B. Reyna v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 105th District Court of Kleberg County

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Texas » 13th District Court of Appeals » 2004 » Tranquilino B. Reyna v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 105th District Court of Kleberg County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 13-04-00603-CR

Case Date: 12/30/2004

Plaintiff: Tranquilino B. Reyna

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 105th District Court of Kleberg County

Preview:Juan Jose Andrade v. The State of Texas--Appeal from
186th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
No. 04-00-00169-CR & 04-00-00170-CR
Juan Jose ANDRADE,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1994-CR-0519 & 1994-CR-0520
Honorable Sam Katz, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice
Alma L. L pez, Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Delivered and Filed: June 6, 2001
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
The trial court revoked Juan Jose Andrade's community supervision after he pleaded true to the State's allegations that
he violated certain conditions of his probation. Andrade appeals the revocation on the grounds that he received
ineffective assistance of counsel during the revocation hearing, rendering his plea of true involuntary. We dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Factual & Procedural Background
On September 6, 1994, Andrade pleaded guilty to Aggravated Assault on a Peace Officer and Aggravated Robbery
with a Deadly Weapon without a plea agreement. The trial court granted his application for deferred adjudication and
placed him on community supervision for ten years. The State filed a Motion to Adjudicate and Revoke in March
2000. At the hearing, Andrade pleaded true to using a controlled substance and failing to report in compliance with the
Intensive Supervision Program. The trial court revoked his probation and sentenced Andrade to ten years confinement
for each offense, the terms to run concurrently. On appeal, he contests the decision due to ineffective assistance of
counsel.
In a single issue, Andrade claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the revocation hearing. He asserts his
counsel allowed him to plead true to the failure to report allegation, even though the time period for which he was to
report had expired. Therefore, he was denied effective representation.
Discussion
The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure proscribes appeal of revocation of deferred adjudication. Tex. Code Crim.
Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001). On direct appeal, Andrade cannot appeal from the trial court's
decision to adjudicate. Phynes v. State, 828 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). As the Court of Criminal Appeals
explains, the Legislature strictly prohibits appeal of issues involving a determination to proceed with an adjudication of
guilt. Olowosuko v. State, 826 S.W.2d 940, 942 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). Even complaints concerning representation by
counsel at a revocation hearing cannot be raised on appeal. Lowe v. State, 997 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Tex. App.-Dallas
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13979.html[8/20/2013 7:33:48 PM]

1999, no pet.). This court is without jurisdiction to address Andrade's issue.
Conclusion
Andrade challenges his representation at the hearing to determine revocation of deferred adjudication. The Texas Code
of Criminal Procedure directly states that no appeal may be taken from that determination under the circumstances in
this case. Therefore, we lack the jurisdiction to address Andrade's issue and dismiss this appeal.
Karen Angelini, Justice
DO NOT PUBLISH
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13979.html[8/20/2013 7:33:48 PM]

Download 13979.pdf