Maria Isabel Velasquez v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )


Menu:
  •                                     In The
    Court of Appeals
    Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
    No. 07-23-00385-CR
    MARIA ISABEL VELASQUEZ, APPELLANT
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
    On Appeal from the 181st District Court
    Potter County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 081727-B-CR, Honorable Titiana Frausto, Presiding
    July 3, 2024
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ.
    Appellant, Maria Isabel Velasquez, seeks reformation of the trial court’s order
    placing her on deferred adjudication. We reform the judgment and affirm.
    Appellant was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a second-
    degree felony.1 The State gave notice of an enhancement paragraph alleging that
    Appellant had previously been convicted of a felony, namely possession of a controlled
    1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a)(2), (b).
    substance. The enhancement paragraph, if proven, would make Appellant’s offense
    punishable as a first-degree felony.2
    Appellant entered into a plea agreement with the State. Under the terms of the
    agreement, Appellant pleaded guilty and the State waived the enhancement paragraph
    and recommended deferred adjudication. The trial court accepted Appellant’s plea,
    deferred adjudication, and placed her on community supervision for a period of ten years.
    In this appeal, Appellant asserts that the order placing her on deferred adjudication
    should be reformed because it does not reflect the proper degree of offense to which she
    pleaded guilty. The State concedes the issue, and we agree.
    The trial court’s Order of Deferred Adjudication recites the “degree of offense” as
    a felony of the first degree.3 However, the record shows that Appellant pleaded guilty to
    the second-degree felony offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
    Appellate courts have the power to reform whatever the trial court could have
    corrected by a judgment nunc pro tunc where the evidence necessary to correct the
    judgment appears in the record. Robinson v. State, 
    568 S.W.3d 718
    , 724–25 (Tex.
    App.—Amarillo 2019, no pet.). Accordingly, we reform the Order of Deferred Adjudication
    to reflect that the offense for which adjudication is deferred is a second-degree felony.
    2 
    Id.
     § 12.42(b); see Ford v. State, 
    334 S.W.3d 230
    , 234 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (section 12.42 of
    Penal Code increases level of punishment for primary offense but does not elevate grade of primary
    offense).
    3 The order accurately reflects “N/A” on the plea to the enhancement paragraph and “N/A” on the
    finding on the enhancement.
    2
    The trial court’s order is affirmed as reformed.
    Judy C. Parker
    Justice
    Do not publish.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-23-00385-CR

Filed Date: 7/3/2024

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/4/2024