Jonathan Paul Desoto v. State ( 2005 )

                             NUMBER 13-04-025-CR

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

___________________________________________________________________

JONATHAN PAUL DESOTO,                                       Appellant,

                                           v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                              Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

                   On appeal from the 24th District Court

                           of Calhoun County, Texas.

__________________________________________________________________

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

       Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Rodriguez

                      Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez

On December 4, 2003, appellant, Jonathan Paul DeSoto, was sentenced to forty years imprisonment for aggravated robbery and ten years imprisonment for aggravated assault.  The sentences were to run consecutively.  In his sole point of error, appellant contends that the trial court=s pronouncement of the cumulative sentences was not sufficiently specific, and therefore the sentences should run concurrently.  We affirm.

It is well settled that where sentences are pronounced on the same day in the same court, a reference of one to the other by cause number only is sufficient to effect cumulation of the sentences.  See Jackson v. State, 449 S.W.2d 242, 244 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Ex Parte Lewis, 414 S.W.2d 682, 683 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967); Ex Parte Ogletree, 328 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1959). Therefore, the order of cumulation in this case, being made in the same court, entered on the same day as the sentence to which it is made cumulative, and referring to the cause number of such sentence, is deemed sufficient.  Jackson, 449 S.W.2d at 244 (citing Ex parte March, 423 S.W.2d 916, 916 (1968)).  Appellant=s sole point of error is overruled.

Accordingly the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 7th day of July, 2005.