Vinince Paul Jones v. The State of Texas Appeal from 402nd District Court of Wood County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-19-00176-CR VININCE PAUL JONES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 402nd District Court Wood County, Texas Trial Court No. 23,386-2017 Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Stevens MEMORANDUM OPINION Vinince Paul Jones pled guilty to and was convicted of evading arrest or detention with a motor vehicle. Pursuant to the terms of his plea bargain agreement with the State, Jones was placed on community supervision for ten years and was ordered to pay a $500.00 fine and courts costs. The terms and conditions of Jones’s community supervision incorporated the trial court’s orders and also required him to refrain from committing another offense. The State moved to revoke Jones’s community supervision, alleging that Jones caused bodily injury to his girlfriend by choking her. After the trial court found the State’s allegation true, it revoked Jones’s community supervision, sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment, imposed the originally assessed $500.00 fine, and ordered him to pay $413.00 in court costs. On appeal, Jones raises issues common to his appeal in companion case number 06-1900175-CR. Jones argues that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay, insufficient evidence supports the revocation, and the fine originally assessed when Jones was placed on community supervision should be removed because it was not orally pronounced at the revocation hearing. We addressed these issues in detail in our opinion of this date on Jones’s appeal in cause number 06-19-00175-CR. For the reasons stated there, we likewise conclude here that (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Jones’s hearsay objection, (2) sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s revocation of Jones’s community supervision, and (3) the fine was properly assessed. 2 We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Scott E. Stevens Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: February 18, 2020 February 19, 2020 Do Not Publish 3
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.
