Jonathan Paul Desoto v. State
This text of Jonathan Paul Desoto v. State (Jonathan Paul Desoto v. State) 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
|
|
NUMBER 13-04-025-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
___________________________________________________________________
JONATHAN PAUL DESOTO, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 24th District Court
of Calhoun County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Rodriguez
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez
On December 4, 2003, appellant, Jonathan Paul DeSoto, was sentenced to forty years imprisonment for aggravated robbery and ten years imprisonment for aggravated assault. The sentences were to run consecutively. In his sole point of error, appellant contends that the trial court=s pronouncement of the cumulative sentences was not sufficiently specific, and therefore the sentences should run concurrently. We affirm.
It is well settled that where sentences are pronounced on the same day in the same court, a reference of one to the other by cause number only is sufficient to effect cumulation of the sentences. See Jackson v. State, 449 S.W.2d 242, 244 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Ex Parte Lewis, 414 S.W.2d 682, 683 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967); Ex Parte Ogletree, 328 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1959). Therefore, the order of cumulation in this case, being made in the same court, entered on the same day as the sentence to which it is made cumulative, and referring to the cause number of such sentence, is deemed sufficient. Jackson, 449 S.W.2d at 244 (citing Ex parte March, 423 S.W.2d 916, 916 (1968)). Appellant=s sole point of error is overruled.
Accordingly the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ
Justice
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed
this 7th day of July, 2005.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jonathan Paul Desoto v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jonathan-paul-desoto-v-state-texapp-2005.