Ray Mendoza Miranda v. State ( 2014 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2014 NO. 03-13-00103-CR Ray M. Miranda, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee APPEAL FROM 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment of conviction but that there was error requiring correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment of conviction to delete the cumulation order. The Court affirms the judgment of conviction as modified. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made. TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2014 NO. 03-13-00182-CR Ray M. Miranda, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee APPEAL FROM 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment of conviction but that there was error requiring correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment of conviction to delete the cumulation order. The Court affirms the judgment of conviction as modified. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made. TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2014 NO. 03-13-00183-CR Ray M. Miranda, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee APPEAL FROM 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment of conviction but that there was error requiring correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment of conviction to delete the cumulation order. The Court affirms the judgment of conviction as modified. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made. TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2014 NO. 03-13-00184-CR Ray M. Miranda, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee APPEAL FROM 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment of conviction but that there was error requiring correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment of conviction to delete the cumulation order. The Court affirms the judgment of conviction as modified. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made. TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 24, 2014 NO. 03-13-00185-CR Ray M. Miranda, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee APPEAL FROM 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, GOODWIN, AND FIELD MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judgment of conviction but that there was error requiring correction. Therefore, the Court modifies the trial court’s judgment of conviction to delete the cumulation order. The Court affirms the judgment of conviction as modified. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.