Michael Floyd King v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 35th District Court of Brown County

11th Court of Appeals

Eastland, Texas

Opinion

Michael Floyd King

Appellant

Vs. No. 11-01-00361-CR -- Appeal from Brown County

State of Texas

Appellee

Michael Floyd King appeals from the judgment revoking his community supervision. Appellant originally pleaded guilty to the offense of felony driving while intoxicated. The trial court convicted appellant and assessed his punishment at confinement for 10 years and a fine of $3,000, but the court suspended the imposition of confinement and placed appellant on community supervision for 10 years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke appellant=s community supervision. After a hearing in which appellant pleaded true to one of the State=s allegations, the trial court revoked appellant=s community supervision and assessed his punishment at confinement for 6 years. We affirm.

Appellant has briefed two points of error on appeal and challenges all but one of the trial court=s findings with respect to the revocation. Appellant does not challenge the trial court=s finding that he violated a term and condition of his community supervision as alleged in the first allegation of the State=s motion to revoke. Appellant pleaded true to that allegation and not true to the other nine allegations in the State=s motion to revoke. Appellant stipulated that he committed the offense of driving while his license was invalid in violation of Condition No. 1 of the order placing him on community supervision. A plea of true to one allegation in a motion to revoke community supervision is alone sufficient to support the trial court=s decision to revoke. Moore v. State, 605 S.W.2d 924 (Tex.Cr.App.1980); Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469 (Tex.Cr.App.1979); Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127 (Tex.Cr.App.1979). Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking appellant=s community supervision. Because we are upholding the revocation based upon the unchallenged finding, we need not address appellant=s contentions regarding the trial court=s remaining findings. TEX.R.APP.P. 47.1.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

JIM R. WRIGHT

JUSTICE

February 27, 2003

Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Arnot, C.J., and

Wright, J., and McCall, J.