Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

970 S.W.2d 174

Rylander v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 21, 1998

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1998-05-21

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2001

1 state decisions

Relies on Lindsey v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1998-05-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

PER CURIAM.

¶2Savoy Rylander appeals from the revocation of her community supervision. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 23(b) (Vernon Supp.1998). She argues that because the trial court failed to admonish her as to the possible punishment range, her plea of true was involuntary. We affirm.

¶3Appellant pleaded guilty, under a plea-bargain agreement, to forgery by check. The trial court sentenced her to one year’s confinement, probated for two years, and a $300 fine. The State then filed a motion to revoke appellant’s community supervision. Appellant pleaded true, and the court sentenced appellant to 180 days’ confinement.

¶4Appellant argues that the trial court did not advise her of the possible range of punishment before she pleaded true. The mandatory admonishments a trial court must give when a defendant pleads guilty do not apply when a defendant pleads true in a revocation of community supervision proceeding. See Lindsey v. State, 902 S.W.2d 9, 12 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1995, no pet.). Accordingly, her plea was not rendered involuntary.

¶5*175We overrule appellant’s sole issue and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/970/sw2d/174 · .json · Public domain