Sir Jason Douglas Robinson, Jr. v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-23-00123-CR
___________________________
SIR JASON DOUGLAS ROBINSON, JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 211th District Court
Denton County, Texas
Trial Court No. F22-184-211
Before Birdwell, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found Appellant Sir Jason Douglas Robinson Jr. guilty of occlusion
assault, a third-degree felony, and assessed his punishment at 54 months in prison. See
Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2)(B); Ortiz v. State, 623 S.W.3d 804, 805 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2021) (referring to the offense as occlusion assault). In the judgment, the
trial court made a separate family-violence finding.
On appeal, Robinson raises two issues: (1) he argues that the finding of family
violence in the judgment should be stricken because the trial court did not pronounce
the finding when sentencing him, and (2) he contends that the trial court erred by not
submitting a lesser-included-offense instruction of misdemeanor assault in the jury
charge. We hold that the trial court was not required to orally make a family-violence
finding when sentencing Robinson as a prerequisite to including the finding in the
judgment. We further hold that the trial court did not err by refusing to include the
lesser-included-offense instruction. We overrule both of Robinson’s issues and affirm
the trial court’s judgment.
I. The Family-Violence Finding
In Robinson’s first issue, he contends that because the trial court did not
pronounce a family-violence finding when sentencing him, the family-violence finding
in the judgment should be stricken. But we have previously addressed and rejected the
argument that a trial court must, as a prerequisite to including a family-violence
finding in the judgment, pronounce the family-violence finding when sentencing a
2
defendant. See Meinzer v. State, No. 02-23-00005-CR, 2024 WL 1100478, at *6 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth Mar. 14, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication)
(“[B]ecause a family violence finding is not a sentencing issue, because [an oral]
finding . . . is not statutorily required, and because the Court of Criminal Appeals has
not signaled that an oral rendition is necessary, we reject [the] argument that a trial
court must orally pronounce [the] finding during sentencing.”). We overrule
Robinson’s first issue.
II. The Lesser-Included Offense Request
In Robinson’s second issue, he argues that the trial court erred by refusing to
charge the jury on the lesser-included offense of misdemeanor assault. The Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals has addressed and rejected this argument. See Ortiz, 623
S.W.3d at 805 (“We hold that bodily-injury assault is not a lesser-included offense of
occlusion assault when the disputed element is the injury because the statutorily
specified injury of impeding normal breathing or blood circulation is exclusive of
other bodily injuries.”). We overrule Robinson’s second issue.
III. Conclusion
Having overruled both of Robinson’s issues, we affirm the trial court’s
judgment.
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: May 9, 2024
3