TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-00-00084-CR
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
NO. 0944234, HONORABLE JON N. WISSER, JUDGE PRESIDING
On October 6, 1994, Garza pleaded guilty to the charge of aggravated assault. The trial court found Garza guilty of the offense and assessed punishment at seven years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division, but suspended imposition of the sentence and placed him on community supervision. The State filed its third motion to revoke community supervision alleging Garza failed to report to his probation officer, failed to support his dependents, failed to pay community supervision fees, and committed a subsequent criminal offense of driving while intoxicated, all in violation of the supervision terms he was ordered to obey. Garza pleaded not true to the allegations.
Following a hearing on the motion to revoke, the trial court found all four allegations to be true and rendered a judgment revoking community supervision and imposing a sentence of four years' confinement. On appeal, Garza only challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that he violated the conditions of his probation by committing the offense of driving while intoxicated. Garza does not challenge the remaining three grounds for revocation.
On appeal of a probation revocation hearing, the only question is whether the trial court abused its discretion. Flournoy v. State, 589 S.W.2d 705, 709 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). We will examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's order of revocation. Allbright v. State, 13 S.W.3d 817, 818 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2000, no pet.).
In a probation revocation hearing, proof of any alleged violation of probation is sufficient to support revocation of probation. Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469, 470 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). Garza only challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on one of the grounds supporting the trial court's order of revocation. Because any single unchallenged ground will support revocation, we hold that he has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation. See id. We overrule Garza's sole issue and affirm the trial court order revoking Garza's community supervision and sentencing him to confinement.
Marilyn Aboussie, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Kidd and B. A. Smith
Affirmed
Filed: August 31, 2000
Do Not Publish