AFFIRM AS MODIFIED; Opinion Filed December 11, 2020
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-01493-CR
DELVRON TURNER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F13-60042-R
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Schenck, Osborne, and Partida-Kipness
Opinion by Justice Schenck
Delvron Turner appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery. In his first
issue, appellant urges a portion of the time payment fee is facially unconstitutional.
In his second issue, appellant argues the judgment should be modified to reflect the
community-supervision conditions he was found to have violated. We affirm the
judgment as modified below. Because all issues are settled in law, we issue this
memorandum opinion. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4.
BACKGROUND
Appellant was charged by indictment with the offense of aggravated robbery
with a deadly weapon. On December 18, 2013, appellant entered into a plea bargain
agreement with the State. The trial court accepted appellant’s plea and judicial
confession and placed appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for
a period of six years.
On December 1, 2017, the State filed a third motion to proceed with an
adjudication of guilt, and later on November 4, 2019, the State filed an amended
motion.1 The trial court conducted a hearing on the State’s amended motion at which
appellant entered a plea of true to all allegations with the exception of the allegation
he failed to complete community services hours as directed (allegation L). The trial
court admitted appellant’s written plea of true and judicial confession. The trial
court also took judicial notice of the contents of the court’s file. The trial court found
appellant guilty of the charged offense, made an affirmative deadly-weapon finding,
revoked his community supervision, and sentenced him to five years’ confinement.
DISCUSSION
In his first issue, appellant contends a portion of a $25 time payment fee
assessed as part of the court costs in the arson case under section 133.103 of the
1
On July 11, 2014, the State filed its first motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt and later filed
an amended motion on February 2, 2015, which it subsequently withdrew when the trial court entered an
order modifying the conditions of community supervision. On September 24, 2015, the State filed a second
motion, which the trial court denied, but the trial court also entered orders modifying the conditions of
community supervision and extending the period of community supervision for one year.
–2–
Local Government Code is facially unconstitutional. This Court recently addressed
this exact issue and concluded subsections (b) and (d) of section 133.103 are facially
unconstitutional. See Ovalle v. State, 592 S.W.3d 615, 618 (Tex. App.—Dallas
2020, pet. filed). Acknowledging this Court’s holding in Ovalle, the State agrees
that the $25 fee labeled as “IP PLN” should be reduced by $22.50 to $2.50.
Accordingly, we sustain appellant’s first issue and modify the trial court’s
judgment to reduce the total amount of court costs by $22.50 to reflect the reduction
in the time payment fee from $25 to $2.50.
In his second issue, appellant argues the judgment should be modified to
reflect the community-supervision conditions he was found to violate. The State’s
amended motion alleged appellant had violated conditions A, B, C, D, E, H, J, K, L,
N, and T. At the hearing, the State withdrew its allegation pertaining to condition
L, and appellant entered pleas of true to the remaining alleged violations. The
written judgment, however, lists condition L as one of the conditions appellant
violated.
This Court has the power to modify an incorrect judgment to make the record
speak the truth when we have the necessary information before us to do so. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 43.2(b); French v. State, 830 S.W.2d 607, 609 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992).
Accordingly, we sustain appellant’s second issue and modify the judgment to delete
condition L from the judgment as a condition appellant violated.
–3–
CONCLUSION
As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
/David J. Schenck/
DAVID J. SCHENCK
JUSTICE
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47
191493F.U05
–4–
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
DELVRON TURNER, Appellant On Appeal from the 265th Judicial
District Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-19-01493-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F13-60042-R.
Opinion delivered by Justice
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Schenck. Justices Osborne and
Partida-Kipness participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is
MODIFIED as follows:
We modify the trial court’s judgment to reduce the total amount of
court costs by $22.50 to reflect the reduction in the time payment fee
from $25 to $2.50.
We modify the judgment to delete condition L from the judgment as a
condition appellant violated.
As REFORMED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered this 11th day of December, 2020.
–5–