Edwardo Angel Becerra v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 25, 2021
• Docket: 05-20-00479-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

AFFIRMED as MODIFIED and Opinion Filed May 25, 2021

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00479-CR

EDWARDO ANGEL BECERRA, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F13-53142-M

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Reichek After Edwardo Angel Becerra violated conditions of his deferred adjudication

community supervision, the trial court adjudicated him guilty and sentenced him to

ten years in prison. On appeal, he brings three issues seeking to correct errors in the

judgment. We sustain appellant’s issues and modify the trial court’s judgment to

correct the errors. We affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified.

In 2013, appellant pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm by a

felon. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 46.04. The trial court deferred a finding of guilt

and placed appellant on four years’ community supervision. Over the course of the

next several years, the trial court twice extended appellant’s community supervision and also modified the conditions. In March 2020, the State filed an amended motion

to revoke appellant’s community supervision or proceed with an adjudication of

guilt. The motion alleged violations of his probation conditions D, H, J, K, L, M, N,

Q, U, and CC, which involve his failure to (1) report, (2) pay court costs, fines, and

various fees, (3) complete community service hours, and (4) participate in the court’s

IIP program and the residential substance abuse treatment program as well as his

actions in possessing, consuming, or purchasing alcoholic beverages or illegal

controlled substances. Appellant entered an open plea of true to the allegations

contained in the amended motion, and the trial court adjudicated him guilty and

assessed punishment at ten years in prison.

On appeal, appellant has identified the following errors in the judgment: (1) it

incorrectly lists section 46.05 of the penal code as the statute for the offense; (2) it

incorrectly reflects that he pleaded true to the community supervision violations in

exchange for a plea bargain of ten years in prison when he actually entered an open

plea of true; and (3) it incorrectly states that the trial court granted the State’s original

motion to adjudicate guilt, rather than the amended motion, and omits violations Q,

U, and CC. Having reviewed the record, we agree with appellant.

We have the power to modify an incorrect judgment to make the record speak

the truth when we have the necessary information to do so. See TEX. R. APP. P.

43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.3d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v.

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

–2– We sustain appellant’s issues. We modify the judgment to reflect (1) the

statute for the offense is section 46.04 of the penal code, (2) there was no plea

bargain agreement, and (3) appellant violated conditions D, H, J, K, L, M, N, N, Q,

U, and CC, as set out in the State’s Amended Motion to Revoke Probation or Proceed

with an Adjudication of Guilt.

We affirm the judgment as modified.

/Amanda L. Reichek/ AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200479F.U05

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

EDWARDO ANGEL BECERRA, On Appeal from the 194th Judicial Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F13-53142-M. No. 05-20-00479-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Reichek; Justices Schenck and THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Carlyle participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows:

(1) to show the "Statute for Offense" as section 46.04 of the Texas Penal Code;

(2) to delete “10 YEARS TDCJ” and replace with “N/A” under “Terms of Plea Bargain”; and

(3) to reflect appellant violated conditions D, H, J, K, L, M, N, Q, U, and CC as set out in the State’s AMENDED MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATION OR PROCEED WITH AN ADJUDICATION OF GUILT.

As MODIFIED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered May 25, 2021

–4–