Michael Aaron Taylor v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 31, 2017
Docket05-16-00945-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Michael Aaron Taylor v. State (Michael Aaron Taylor 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.

Bluebook
Michael Aaron Taylor v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed July 31, 2017.

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00944-CR No. 05-16-00945-CR

MICHAEL AARON TAYLOR, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F14-45333-CR & F15-24320-R

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Brown, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Brown Michael Aaron Taylor pleaded guilty to two charges of assault involving family violence,

enhanced and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for a period of five

years. The State subsequently filed motions to proceed with an adjudication of guilt in both

cases asserting appellant violated several conditions of his community supervision. Appellant

pleaded not true to the allegations in the State’s motions. The trial court subsequently found two

of the allegations in the State’s motions true, adjudicated appellant guilty of the offenses, and

assessed his punishment at ten years’ confinement in each case.

In a single issue, appellant requests that we reform the judgments in each case because

they both incorrectly recite appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the State’s motion to

revoke. The State acknowledges the judgments are incorrect and reformation is appropriate. We agree. See Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State,

813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). We therefore sustain appellant’s

sole issue and reform the judgments in each case to reflect appellant’s pleas of not true

As reformed, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.

/Ada Brown/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX.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

160944F.U05

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

MICHAEL AARON TAYLOR, Appellant On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-16-00944-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F14-45333-R. Opinion delivered by Justice Brown. Justices THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Francis and Schenck participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 31st day of July, 2017.

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

MICHAEL AARON TAYLOR, Appellant On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-16-00945-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F15-24320-R. Opinion delivered by Justice Brown. Justices THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Francis and Schenck participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Asberry v. State
813 S.W.2d 526 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Bigley v. State
865 S.W.2d 26 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael Aaron Taylor v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-aaron-taylor-v-state-texapp-2017.