Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas

DecidedNovember 18, 2021

Docket14-20-00142-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas (Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas) 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

Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed November 18, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00142-CR

TRISTAN ANDRE WILLIAMS, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1557222

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant was charged with continuous sexual abuse but pled guilty to the lesser-included offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court assessed punishment at confinement for thirty-five years. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. In a single issue, counsel contends the judgment of conviction erroneously recites appellant was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child.

Appellant was indicted for the offense of continuous sexual abuse of a child. The record reflects the State reduced the charge to aggravated sexual assault of a child and that is the offense to which appellant entered a plea of guilty. In its brief, the State agrees the judgment should be modified to accurately reflect the offense to which appellant pled guilty. Accordingly, we sustain appellant’s sole issue and modify the judgment of the trial court to reflect appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b).

Further, the judgment contains the following special finding, “APPEAL WAIVED. NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED.” The record does not demonstrate there was consideration for appellant’s plea to the reduced charge. See Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d 801, 807–08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016); Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). The record reflects when appellant entered his plea of guilty, the trial court informed appellant that he had the right of appeal. A corrected certification of the defendant’s right of appeal reflects defendant had the right of appeal. We therefore modify the judgment to delete the special finding.

As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Spain and Wilson. 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

Affirmed as Modified and Memorandum Opinion filed November 18, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00142-CR

TRISTAN ANDRE WILLIAMS, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1557222

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant was charged with continuous sexual abuse but pled guilty to the lesser-included offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court assessed punishment at confinement for thirty-five years. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. In a single issue, counsel contends the judgment of conviction erroneously recites appellant was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child.

Appellant was indicted for the offense of continuous sexual abuse of a child. The record reflects the State reduced the charge to aggravated sexual assault of a child and that is the offense to which appellant entered a plea of guilty. In its brief, the State agrees the judgment should be modified to accurately reflect the offense to which appellant pled guilty. Accordingly, we sustain appellant’s sole issue and modify the judgment of the trial court to reflect appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b).

Further, the judgment contains the following special finding, “APPEAL WAIVED. NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED.” The record does not demonstrate there was consideration for appellant’s plea to the reduced charge. See Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d 801, 807–08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016); Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). The record reflects when appellant entered his plea of guilty, the trial court informed appellant that he had the right of appeal. A corrected certification of the defendant’s right of appeal reflects defendant had the right of appeal. We therefore modify the judgment to delete the special finding.

As modified, the judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Spain and Wilson. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Tristan Andre Williams v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tristan-andre-williams-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.

Opinion

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack