Arthur Jackson v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 3, 2024
• Docket: 05-24-00124-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED and Opinion Filed October 3, 2024

In the Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00124-CR

ARTHUR JACKSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F18-51556

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Reichek, Carlyle, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Carlyle Appellant Arthur Jackson pled guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly

weapon and received deferred adjudication. Five years later, the State filed a motion

to adjudicate Jackson’s guilt, Jackson entered an open plea of true to the State’s

allegation, and the trial court sentenced him to fifteen years of confinement in the

Texas Department of Corrections. We affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified

in this memorandum opinion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.

In a single issue on appeal, Jackson contends—and the State agrees—that we

should correct the judgment adjudicating guilt to reflect that he did not enter into a plea bargain with the State concerning its motion to adjudicate his guilt. We have

the power and duty to modify an incorrect judgment to make the record speak the

truth. Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d)

(en banc). We modify the judgment to reflect that there was no plea bargain

agreement with the State concerning its motion to adjudicate his guilt.

The State also asks us to modify the judgment to include a deadly weapon

finding. Jackson was charged via indictment with:

knowingly, while in the course of committing theft of property and with intent to obtain or maintain control of said property, threaten[ing] and plac[ing] [the complainant] in fear of imminent bodily injury and death, and the defendant used and exhibited a deadly weapon, to-wit: A KNIFE.

The record shows Jackson signed a judicial confession including this language from

the indictment and includes his original plea agreement, in which he agreed to an

affirmative finding of a deadly weapon, a knife. The original order deferring

adjudication in the case includes Jackson’s guilty plea and the deadly weapon

finding. And, during the revocation hearing, the trial court found Jackson guilty of

the offense of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon as set forth in the

indictment. Thus, we modify the judgment to reflect the deadly weapon finding.

–2– We affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified.

240124f.u05 Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) /Cory L. Carlyle/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE

–3– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

ARTHUR JACKSON, Appellant On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-24-00124-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F18-51556. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Reichek and Nowell participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we MODIFY the judgment (1) in the section titled “Terms of Plea Bargain” to replace “15 YEARS TDC” with “N/A” and (2) in the section titled “Findings on Deadly Weapon” to replace “N/A” with “YES, NOT A FIREARM.”

As MODIFIED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 3rd day of October, 2024.

–4–