Holder v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Holder v. State

618 S.W.2d 80, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1105

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJuly 1, 1981

Docket67553

StatusPublished

Cited by17 cases

This text of 618 S.W.2d 80 (Holder v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Holder v. State, 618 S.W.2d 80, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1105 (Tex. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the trial court adjudicating appellant’s guilt under the provisions of Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), V.A.C.C.P. Punishment, for the primary offense of possession of over four ounces of marihuana, was assessed at confinement for two years.

The record reflects that appellant pled guilty to the primary offense and was granted deferred adjudication by the trial court. See Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d, supra. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing and proceeded with an adjudication of appellant’s guilt. Appellant violated the terms of his probation by possessing a usable quantity of marihuana less than two ounces.

Appellant argues that the evidence recovered and used against him at the hearing to determine whether to adjudicate guilt was the result of an illegal search and seizure. We simply cannot reach this contention. Although the appellant was “entitled to a hearing limited to the determination by the court of whether it proceeds with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge,” by the express provisions of Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), no appeal may be taken from this determination. Any complaint with this procedure is more properly directed to the legislature as it alone has vested the trial court with such discretion under Art. 42.12, sec. 3d(b).

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the trial court adjudicating appellant’s guilt under the provisions of Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), V.A.C.C.P. Punishment, for the primary offense of possession of over four ounces of marihuana, was assessed at confinement for two years.

The record reflects that appellant pled guilty to the primary offense and was granted deferred adjudication by the trial court. See Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d, supra. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing and proceeded with an adjudication of appellant’s guilt. Appellant violated the terms of his probation by possessing a usable quantity of marihuana less than two ounces.

Appellant argues that the evidence recovered and used against him at the hearing to determine whether to adjudicate guilt was the result of an illegal search and seizure. We simply cannot reach this contention. Although the appellant was “entitled to a hearing limited to the determination by the court of whether it proceeds with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge,” by the express provisions of Art. 42.12, Sec. 3d(b), no appeal may be taken from this determination. Any complaint with this procedure is more properly directed to the legislature as it alone has vested the trial court with such discretion under Art. 42.12, sec. 3d(b).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

618 S.W.2d 80, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holder-v-state-texcrimapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack