Michael Henry Wright v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 1, 2010
Docket01-08-00925-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Michael Henry Wright v. State (Michael Henry Wright 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 Henry Wright v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

Opinion to: SR TJ EVK ERA GCH LCH JB JS MM TGT

Opinion issued April 1, 2010

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas


NO. 01-08-00925-CR


MICHAEL HENRY WRIGHT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1172742


MEMORANDUM OPINION

In his sole issue, Michael Henry Wright, appellant, contends the trial court’s judgment erroneously reflects that he was convicted of the first degree felony of aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 14.  Appellant requests that we modify the judgment to show he was convicted of second degree indecency with a child by contact.  The State agrees that the judgment should be modified.    

The record shows appellant was initially charged with the first degree felony of aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 14 that occurred on or about February 17, 2007.  Appellant pleaded guilty without an agreed recommendation to the reduced charge of second degree indecency with a child by contact.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11 (Vernon Supp. 2009).  Although there is no dispute appellant pleaded guilty and was convicted of second degree indecency with a child by contact, the judgment erroneously reflects he was convicted of first degree felony aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 14.

          We modify the judgment to show appellant was convicted of second degree indecency with a child by contact, and affirm the judgment, as modified.  See St. Julian v. State, 132 S.W.3d 512, 517 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. ref’d); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d).

CONCLUSION

          As modified, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

                                                          Elsa Alcala

                                                          Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Alcala and Higley.

Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

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

Related

St. Julian v. State
132 S.W.3d 512 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Asberry v. State
813 S.W.2d 526 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael Henry Wright v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-henry-wright-v-state-texapp-2010.