Garcia v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this Case
The State's petitioned the Supreme Court for discretionary review of this case to determine whether the common-law requirement that the State exercise due diligence in prosecuting a motion to revoke community supervision survived codification. The court of appeals ruled in favor of appellant Victor Martinez Garcia, by applying the common-law due-diligence requirement, which the State argued was superseded by statute. After review of the applicable statute as well as the appellate court record, the Supreme Court concluded that the common-law requirement has indeed been replaced by Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 42.12, section 24, referred to as the "due-diligence statute." Furthermore, the due-diligence statute applies to only two alleged community-supervision violations: "failure to report to a supervision officer as directed or to remain within a specified place." Because the court of appeals analyzed the case under common law instead of under the statute, it erred. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking appellant's community supervision. The appellate court's decision was reversed and the trial court's judgment was reinstated.
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.