In the Matter of R.R.--Appeal from 289th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-03-00030-CV
IN THE MATTER OF R.R.
From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2002-JUV-02752
Honorable Carmen Kelsey, Judge Presiding (1)

Opinion by: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 25, 2003

AFFIRMED

R.R. appeals the trial court's judgment, which found R.R. engaged in delinquent conduct by assaulting another individual causing him bodily injury and which committed R.R. to the Texas Youth Commission. R.R. contends the trial court's judgment fails to sufficiently specify the reasons for his commitment and that the evidence is insufficient to support those reasons and the mandatory findings required to commit R.R. to TYC. Because the issues in this appeal are settled by existing precedent, we affirm the trial court's judgment in this memorandum opinion. Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

1. A trial court making a disposition in a juvenile delinquency case must "state specifically in the order its reasons for the disposition." Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.04(f) (Vernon 2002). Specification of the reasons for the disposition in the order ensures that the child and his family will be advised of the reasons for commitment and will be in a position to challenge those reasons on appeal. In re K.T., No. 04-02-00043-CR, 2003 WL 1090593, at *2 (Tex. App.--San Antonio Mar. 12, 2003, no pet. h.). In this case, the order states "the child needs a highly structured environment with constant supervision and control." The order further states, "At TYC before & didn't avail yourself of the svcs; subsequent offenses after parole; need for more restricted env for rehab." We hold that the order specifically states the reasons for disposition.

2. In his second and third issues, R.R. contends that the evidence is insufficient to support both the reasons given by the trial court for committing him and the mandatory findings needed to commit him. Although R.R. phrases his issues in terms of evidentiary challenges, we review the trial court's disposition order under a criminal abuse of discretion standard - divorced from evidentiary standards. In re K.T., 2003 WL 1090593, at *8. Accordingly, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's ruling, affording almost total deference to findings of historical fact that are supported by the record. Id. However, when the resolution of the factual issue does not turn upon an evaluation of credibility or demeanor, we review the trial court's determination of the applicable law, as well as its application of the appropriate law to the facts it has found, de novo. Id.

In order to commit R.R. to TYC, the court must have found that R.R., in his home, "cannot be provided the quality of care and level of support and supervision that [he] needs to meet the conditions of the probation." Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.04(c) (Vernon 2002). The trial court also must have found: (1) it is in R.R.'s best interests to be placed outside his home; (2) reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for R.R.'s removal from the home and to make it possible for R.R. to return to his home; and (3) R.R., in his home, cannot be provided the quality of care and level of support and supervision that he needs to meet the conditions of probation. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.04(I) (Vernon 2002). In this case, the court included written findings in its judgment that R.R. had been at TYC before and did not avail himself of the services available to him. The court further found that R.R. had committed additional offenses after parole and needed a more restricted environment for rehabilitation. At the conclusion of the disposition hearing, the trial court also made the following verbal findings:

THE COURT: At this time, [R.R.], the court will accept the recommendation of the Probation Department and I will commit you to the Texas Youth Commission. The sanction level appears to be a 6. We have tried that before and apparently you haven't availed yourself of the programs available with the Texas Youth Commission. And I think it would be a deviation to try to do something else when it is obvious that more restrictions are required.

Also, there are subsequent offenses since you last completed your parole. Therefore, I will accept the recommendations of the Probation Department and commit you to the Texas Youth Commission. Anything further by the State?

R.R. signed a written waiver and consent to stipulation of testimony. Attached to the waiver is a report prepared by the campus police officer who investigated the assault. The report states that the officer was advised by the vice-principal that R.R. assaulted another male student and "took off running." The other male student was bleeding from his mouth and teeth. The officer was unable to locate R.R. Sometime later, the vice-principal contacted the officer because R.R. was in his office. R.R. was arrested for assault. The officer noted that R.R. "had a strong and offensive distinct odor of marijuana in his clothes and on his hands." R.R.'s eyes were watery and droopy, and he had poor and unsteady balance. The officer concluded that R.R. committed the offense of public intoxication when he appeared at the school intoxicated to the degree that he may endanger himself or others.

The predisposition report notes that in addition to the assault charge, R.R. also had been charged with possession of marijuana and criminal trespass in two unrelated events. The report further notes that R.R. previously was committed to TYC for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. The report states that R.R. denies any gang affiliation; however, R.R. admits that he associates with one gang on a regular basis. One of R.R.'s peers is an identified gang member in the San Antonio Police Department's Gang Database. R.R.'s grandfather, who is R.R.'s guardian, testified that he supervises R.R.; however, R.R.'s grandfather acknowledged that when he is at work, R.R. would be at home alone.

Given the evidence presented, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in committing R.R. to TYC. The trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

1. The Honorable Associate Judge Johnny Thomas presided over the hearings and entered a recommended dispositional order of commitment which was approved by the Honorable Carmen Kelsey.