Claude Mutebutsi v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 30, 2025
• Docket: 07-25-00101-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-25-00101-CR

CLAUDE MUTEBUTSI, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

On Appeal from the 251st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 30737C, Honorable Ana Estevez, Presiding

October 30, 2025 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ.

Appellant, Claude Mutebutsi, appeals from a judgment adjudicating him guilty of

sexual assault.1 The trial court orally pronounced a sentence of eight years of

confinement in prison, but the written judgment reflects twelve years of confinement and

a $1,000 fine. By a single issue, Appellant asks us to reform the judgment to match the

pronounced sentence. The State agrees with Appellant and requests that we expedite

1 TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.11 (a)(1). issuance of our decision2 and to suspend the requirements of Texas Rules of Appellate

Procedure 39.8. We agree with Appellant and the State and modify the judgment

accordingly.

ANALYSIS

Texas law requires a sentence to be pronounced in the defendant’s presence. TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 42.03 § 1 (a). Here, the pronounced sentence was eight years’

confinement. When a discrepancy exists between the oral pronouncement and the

written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls. Burt v. State, 445 S.W.3d 752, 757

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The solution in such a situation is to reform the written judgment

to conform to the trial court’s oral pronouncement. Anderson v. State, No. 07-17-00421-

CR, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 2261, at *5 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 22, 2019, pet. ref’d).

Thus, we modify the Judgment Adjudicating Guilt to reflect the Punishment and Place of

Confinement as: Eight (8) Years Institutional Division, TDCJ.

CONCLUSION

We grant the State’s motion to expedite. We modify the judgment to reflect a

punishment of eight years’ confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas

Department of Criminal Justice. As modified, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

Lawrence M. Doss Justice Do not publish.

2 TEX. R. APP. P. 2.