Keion Wilson v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 15, 2019
• Docket: 05-18-00615-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

AFFIRMED as MODIFIED and Opinion Filed February 15, 2019

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00615-CR

KEION WILSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F-1623323-N

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Whitehill, Molberg, and Reichek Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant was charged with intent to deliver a controlled substance in an amount of four

grams or more but less than 200 grams, pled guilty, and in accordance with a plea bargain, the

court deferred adjudication of guilt, placed appellant on five years community supervision, and

assessed a $1,000 fine.

After appellant was subsequently charged with interfering with an emergency request for

assistance, aggravated robbery, and possession of marijuana, the State moved to adjudicate guilt.

After a hearing, the trial court found appellant guilty of intent to deliver a controlled substance in

an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams and assessed punishment at fifteen years

imprisonment. In three issues, appellant requests that we modify the judgment to reflect that (i) he pled

not true to the violations alleged in the motion to adjudicate guilt, (ii) he did not enter into a plea

bargain concerning the motion to adjudicate guilt, and (iii) the trial court found that he violated

condition (a) of his community supervision terms. The State agrees that the judgment should be

so modified.

We are authorized to reform a judgment to make the record speak the truth when we have

the necessary information to do so. Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).

Here, the record reflects that (i) appellant pled not true to the violations alleged in the

motion to adjudicate guilt, (ii) appellant did not enter into a plea bargain concerning the motion to

adjudicate guilt, and (iii) the trial court found that appellant violated condition (a) of his community

supervision terms. We therefore sustain appellant’s issues and modify the judgment accordingly.

As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

/Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 180615F.U05

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

KEION WILSON, Appellant On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-00615-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F-1623323-N. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Molberg and Reichek participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED to reflect that (i) appellant pled not true to the violations alleged in the motion to adjudicate guilt, (ii) appellant did not enter into a plea bargain concerning the motion to adjudicate guilt, and (iii) the trial court found that appellant violated condition (a) of his community supervision terms. As REFORMED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered February 15, 2019

–3–