Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Joe Angel Hernandez pleaded guilty in four separate cases to two counts of theft of a firearm, tampering with physical evidence, and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Under negotiated plea agreements, the trial court suspended two two-year state-jail sentences and placed Hernandez on five years’ community supervision in the firearm-theft cases. It also placed him on ten years’ deferred-adjudication community supervision in the tampering and aggravated-assault cases.
The State later sought revocation and adjudication based on numerous alleged violations. After Hernandez pleaded not true, the trial court found that he had committed new offenses, tested positive for THC, consumed alcohol, failed to complete required classes, and violated curfew. The court revoked his supervision and imposed concurrent sentences of two years in each firearm-theft case, ten years for tampering, and twenty years for aggravated assault.
Appointed appellate counsel filed Anders briefs and motions to withdraw, concluding that the appeals presented no meritorious or arguable issues. Hernandez did not file pro se responses.
The Court’s Holding
After independently reviewing the records, the Eleventh Court of Appeals agreed that the appeals lacked meritorious or arguable grounds. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s rulings, the appellate court held that the evidence sufficiently supported each finding of a supervision violation. Because proof of a single violation is enough to sustain revocation or adjudication, the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
The court nevertheless identified a nonreversible error in the judgment for trial court cause number 22-9029. That judgment assessed $600 in appointed-counsel reimbursement fees even though the original judgment had not imposed those fees, Hernandez had been found indigent, and the record showed no material improvement in his financial circumstances. The court modified that judgment to delete the $600 assessment, affirmed it as modified, affirmed the other three judgments, and granted counsel’s motions to withdraw.
Key Takeaways
- A community-supervision violation need be proved only by a preponderance of the evidence, and one proved violation is sufficient to support revocation or adjudication.
- An indigent defendant may not be charged appointed-counsel reimbursement fees without evidence that the defendant has resources to repay them or that the defendant’s financial circumstances materially changed.
- In an Anders appeal, the appellate court independently reviews the record and may correct a nonreversible judgment error even when no arguable ground for reversal exists.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the limited path to reversal after a trial court finds multiple supervision violations: any one sufficiently supported violation can sustain the revocation or adjudication order. It also confirms that appellate courts may reform criminal judgments to remove unauthorized financial assessments without disturbing otherwise valid convictions and sentences.