Donaldson v. Texas (original by judge newell)
Annotate this CaseThe State charged appellant with one count of making a false statement to obtain property or credit, three counts of tampering with a governmental record, and one count of falsely holding oneself out as a lawyer. Two of the five counts, the making a false statement to obtain property or credit count, and one of the tampering with a governmental record counts, were state-jail felonies. These two counts were the offenses at issue in this appeal: if a defendant pleads true to an enhancement paragraph, can a court of appeals imply a trial court’s finding of true regarding that prior conviction used for enhancement when the trial judge, in his own words, refused to make such a finding? All counts were enhanced by the same two prior felony convictions. The first enhancement paragraph reflected appellant’s 1992 state conviction for credit-card abuse; the second reflected her 1990 federal conviction for mail fraud. Appellant entered an open plea. She judicially confessed to all five counts and pleaded true to both enhancement paragraphs. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find appellant guilty, but it continued the hearing to the next day “to make a determination whether or not a finding of guilt should be made, or whether any finding of guilt should be deferred for a period of years.” The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the court of appeals could not imply the trial court's finding of true regarding the prior conviction used for enhancement when the trial judge refused to make such a finding. The Court therefore reversed the court of appeals and remanded this case for a new punishment hearing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.