Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Heath Wayne Fisher pled guilty to theft from a person (a state-jail felony) and burglary of a habitation (a second-degree felony). Rather than imposing prison time immediately, the trial court suspended both sentences and placed Fisher on community supervision: two years suspended with five years of community supervision for the theft charge, and ten years suspended with eight years of community supervision for the burglary charge.
The State moved to revoke Fisher’s community supervision in both cases, alleging a single violation: that Fisher committed assault in violation of his community supervision rules. At the revocation hearing, Fisher pled “not true” to this allegation. After hearing evidence, the trial court found the allegation true, revoked community supervision in both cases, and activated the previously suspended sentences, imposing two years’ confinement and ten years’ imprisonment respectively.
The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s revocation decisions. The court reiterated that in revocation proceedings, the State need only prove a violation by a preponderance of the evidence—a lower standard than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt burden in criminal cases. The trial court, as fact-finder, is the sole judge of witness credibility and may resolve inconsistencies in testimony.
The appellate court reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling and found it sufficient to support the findings of true in both cases. The court emphasized that proof of a single violation of community supervision terms is legally sufficient to support revocation. Accordingly, the court found no abuse of discretion and affirmed.
The court did note one nonreversible error: the trial court’s judgments incorrectly recited that Fisher pled “true” when he actually pled “not true” to the allegations. The court exercised its authority to modify the judgments to correct this clerical error.