Dana Howell v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Crim Dist Ct 3 of Dallas Co of Dallas County

This is an appeal by Appellant Howell from a judgment revoking his probation and sentencing him to ten years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.

Appellant was charged with and tried for possesion of cocaine less than twenty-eight grams. On December 27, 1989, he was placed on four years deferred adjudication probation. On March 10, 1992, he was adjudicated guilty and placed on ten years probation. On August 27, 1992, he was placed on shock probation. On February 14, 1994, the State filed a motion to revoke Appellant's probation alleging he violated the terms of his probation by (1) not reporting to his probation officer for the months of September, November, December in 1993, and January 1994; (2) not paying $240 in probation fees; and (3) failing to notify the probation department of a change of address.

On February 24, 1994, a revocation hearing was held in which Appellant pled "true" to the violations that he did not report to his probation officer as alleged, and that he did not pay his probation fees as alleged. He pled "not true" to failing to notify the probation officer prior to changing his address.

A written stipulation of evidence which included the two alleged probation violations to which Appellant pled "true," was signed by Appellant and offered in evidence. The trial court found all three alleged probation violations occurred, revoked Appellant's probation, and sentenced him to a term of ten years.

Appellant appeals on two points of error.

Point one: "The trial court erred in failing to withdraw Appellant's pleas of true to the motion to revoke probation."

Although Appellant pled true to failing to report to his probation officer and failing to pay his probation fees, he testified he failed to pay his probation fees because he did not have the money; that he did not report to his probation officer in November because he was working; that his probation officer was on vacation in December; and that he called her in January and she told him that she had "already turned him in," so he concluded "it didn't make sense to report in January."

The probation officer testified that Appellant did not pay his fees and did not report, as alleged in the State's motion to revoke.

Appellant contends that because he presented defensive evidence, the trial court should have withdrawn his pleas of "true."

There is no duty on a trial court to withdraw a plea of true in a revocation of probation proceeding even if the probationer presents a defensive issue. Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App.).

Point one is overruled.

Point two: "The evidence is insufficient to sustain the trial court's finding that Appellant violated his probation by changing his address without permission."

The probation officer testified she was unable to locate Appellant in November 1993 at the address he had provided, and that she was unable to reach him by phone. She sent him a delinquency letter to the address which the post office returned stating on the front of the envelope that Appellant had moved and had not provided a forwarding address. Appellant testified he had not moved and that the post office had made a mistake in returning the letter with that notation.

We find the evidence sufficient to sustain the trial court's finding.

Point two is overruled.

In any event, proof of any one of the alleged violations is sufficient to support the order revoking probation. Moses, supra; Homes v. State, 752 S.W.2d 700 (Tex. App. Waco).

The judgment is affirmed.

FRANK G. McDONALD

Chief Justice (Retired)

Before Chief Justice Thomas,

Justice Vance, and

Chief Justice McDonald (Retired)

Opinion delivered and filed March 29, 1995

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Free Daily Summaries in Your Inbox

You're all set! You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. You can explore additional available newsletters here.