Daniel Obregon v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 175th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-02-00489-CR

Daniel OBREGON,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2001-CR-3086

Honorable Mary Rom n, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 12, 2003

AFFIRMED

Appellant Daniel Obregon pled nolo contendere to the charge of burglary of a habitation. He was sentenced to ten years confinement and fined $1,000.00. However, under the terms of his plea agreement, imposition of his sentence was suspended and Obregon was placed on ten years community supervision. Subsequently, Obregon pled true to the charge of using heroin, a violation of the terms of his suspended sentence. The district court granted the State s motion to revoke Obregon s community supervision, and imposed the sentence Obregon would have initially received, ten years confinement and a $1,000.00 fine.

The district court s judgment states that it was based on a September 4, 2001 suspension order. Obregon argues that no such order is part of the record. He claims that even if that order was part of the record, it has been superseded by two subsequent orders altering and amending the conditions of probation. Based on these assertions, Obregon argues that the district court s order revoking his community supervision is not based on a valid supervision order, and should therefore be set aside.

Our review of the district court s order revoking community supervision is limited to a determination of whether the court abused its discretion. Hays v. State, 933 S.W.2d 659, 660 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1996, no pet.). The record indicates that Obregon was required to refrain from the use of controlled substances. In its September 4, 2001 order, the district court instructed Obregon that his community supervision sentence prohibited him from using controlled substances. This instruction was repeated in the court s subsequent orders dated November 13, 2001 and December 13, 2001. The court s subsequent orders did not modify the requirement that Obregon refrain from using controlled substances. Therefore, Obregon s complaint that the court based its decision on an invalid supervision order is without merit.

Furthermore, the record reflects that Obregon pled true to the allegation that he violated the terms of his community supervision by using heroin. A plea of true standing alone is sufficient to revoke community supervision. Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469, 470 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979); Hays, 933 S.W.2d at 661. Therefore, the district court acted within its discretion in suspending Obregon s community supervision and reinstating the initial sentence of ten years confinement and a fine of $1,000.00

Obregon s sole issue is overruled and the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Catherine Stone, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH