Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Shelton Lamont Powell pleaded guilty to second-degree-felony aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and the trial court made an affirmative family-violence finding. Under a negotiated plea agreement, the court deferred adjudication and placed Powell on community supervision for five years.
The State later moved to adjudicate Powell’s guilt and revoke his community supervision, alleging that he assaulted his sister, failed to report to his probation officer during June 2024, and tested positive for marijuana or cannabinoids. After a hearing, the trial court found the assault and failure-to-report allegations true, adjudicated Powell guilty, revoked his supervision, and sentenced him to 14 years in prison. Powell challenged the evidentiary support for both findings.
The Court’s Holding
The Eleventh Court of Appeals held that a preponderance of the evidence supported the finding that Powell committed a new assault. A final criminal conviction was unnecessary in the revocation proceeding. The detective’s testimony, Powell’s sister’s unobjected-to 9-1-1 call, and the Ring-camera recording collectively supported a reasonable belief that Powell punched his sister and caused bodily injury, even though the alleged blows occurred off camera and no medical or physical evidence was introduced.
The court also held that the evidence supported the finding that Powell failed to report in June 2024. Powell was required to report at least monthly but traveled to New York without prior authorization and missed his scheduled in-person appointment. His same-day voicemail explaining that he was away for work did not establish that he had obtained permission to report by phone or otherwise satisfied the reporting condition. Because either proven violation independently supported revocation, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
Key Takeaways
- The State need only prove a community-supervision violation by a preponderance of the evidence, and proof of one violation is sufficient to support revocation.
- A new offense may support revocation without a final conviction, even if the related criminal charge remains unresolved.
- A probationer’s unauthorized travel and explanatory phone message do not necessarily satisfy a condition requiring monthly reporting.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the broad discretion afforded Texas trial courts in adjudication and revocation proceedings. Appellate courts review the evidence in the light most favorable to the revocation ruling and defer to the trial court’s credibility and weight determinations.
It also confirms that circumstantial and testimonial evidence can establish an assault for revocation purposes without medical documentation or video footage depicting the physical contact, and that technical reporting violations can independently justify revocation.