Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

644 S.W.2d 762

Hayles v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 6, 1982

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1982-07-06

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1985

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““prior to January 1, 1982, the Legislature doubted the court’s authority to impose a thirty day jail term when probation was granted by a jury.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Kadrmas v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1982-07-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

DIES, Chief Justice.

¶2Our former opinion is withdrawn, and the following substituted:

¶3Appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of criminal negligent homicide. In returning its punishment verdict, the jury directed:

“We, the jury, having found the Defendant guilty as charged in the Information assess his penalty at a fine of $1,000 and confinement in the County Jail for a term of 2 years. We further find he has not been previously convicted of a felony and recommend probation of the jail term herein.”

¶4The trial judge entered a judgment granting appellant probation included as the 14th condition thereof the following:

“14. Pursuant to Sec. 6b(a) of said Law served a 30 day term in the County Jail.”

¶5For this judgment, appellant brings this appeal on one ground of error, viz.: “[T]he Trial Court committed reversible error by imposing as a condition of probation that Appellant serve a Thirty (30) day term in the County Jail.”

¶6Effective January 1, 1982, the Legislature amended Sec. 3a of Vernon's Ann. C.C.P., Art. 42.13 (Supp.1982), to read as follows:

“If probation is granted by the jury, the court may impose only those conditions which are set out in Section 6, 6a, 6b, or 6c hereof.”

¶7This would certainly indicate that prior to January 1, 1982, the Legislature doubted the court’s authority to impose a thirty day jail term when probation was granted by a jury, and we now so hold. Therefore, in accordance with the authority granted by Art. 44.24, Subdiv. (b), V.A.C.C.P. (Supp. 1982), we reform and correct the judgment of the trial court to exclude and remove the thirty day jail term. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed.

¶8AFFIRMED.

/644/sw2d/762 · .json · Public domain