Daniel Gonzales-Ortiz v. the State of Texas
This text of Daniel Gonzales-Ortiz v. the State of Texas (Daniel Gonzales-Ortiz v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 16, 2022
NO. 03-21-00532-CR
Daniel Gonzales-Ortiz, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND SMITH MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed
the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no error in the court’s
judgment requiring reversal. However, there was error in the judgment and sentence that
requires correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment and sentence in
cause number 18-1373-K277 to remove the unauthorized costs that were assessed by the trial
court, for total court costs of $658.00. The judgment, as modified, is affirmed. Because
appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made. TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-21-00533-CR
APPEAL FROM THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BAKER, AND SMITH MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE GOODWIN
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed
the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no error in the court’s
judgment requiring reversal. However, there was error in the judgment and sentence that
requires correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment and sentence in
cause number 18-1374-K277 to remove the unauthorized costs that were assessed by the trial
court, for total court costs of $0.00. The judgment, as modified, is affirmed. Because appellant
is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Daniel Gonzales-Ortiz v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-gonzales-ortiz-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.