Abron v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
November 2013
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bigley v. State · Asberry v. State · Coffey v. State · Davis v. State · Marshall v. State
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the context of the revocation of regular probation, the Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that an unprobat-ed fine, orally imposed at the original plea hearing, may be included in the judgment revoking probation even though the fine was not re-pronounced at the revocation hearing. See Coffey v. State, 979 S.W.2d 326, 329 (Tex.Crim.App.1998). Where, however, an accused receives deferred adjudication, there is no sentence imposed. See Davis v. State, 968 S.W.2d 368, 371 (Tex.Crim. App.1998); Hammack v. State, 963 S.W.2d 199, 200 (Tex.App.-Austin 1998, no pet.). The trial court’s Judgment Adjudicating Guilt expressly sets aside the underlying deferred adjudication order and declares it to be “of no further force and effect.” Accordingly, we conclude that the ultimate result of Coffey does not control the outcome of this case. Appellant is entitled to have his sentence, including the assessment of any fines, pronounced in his presence. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.03, § 1(a) (Vernon Supp.1998); Marshall v. State, 860 S.W.2d 142, 143 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1993, no pet.). Where a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement and written memorialization of the sentence, the oral pronouncement controls. See Coffey , at 328. The record shows the trial court did not assess a fine as part of appellant’s sentence following adjudication of guilt. We have the power to modify incorrect judgments when the necessary data and information is available to do so. See TEX. R. APP. P”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.