Enrique Pautel v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

No. 04-00-00060-CR
Enrique PATUEL,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1997-CR-4998
Honorable Sid Harle, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Alma L. L pez, Justice

Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Justice

Alma L. L pez, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 30, 2001

AFFIRMED

Memorandum Opinion (1)

This is an appeal of an order revoking probation following evidence that appellant violated one condition of his community supervision agreement. Appellant admitted to violating his court-imposed curfew and explained that he had inadvertently fallen asleep at his girlfriend's house. When he awoke, he immediately went home. On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation because his violation was not intentional. He further asserted that his overstay with his girlfriend (1) did not have any relationship to his crime; (2) did not relate to conduct that was in itself criminal; and (3) did not involve conduct reasonably related to future criminality. Under the circumstances, appellant asserts that the violation of the curfew was unreasonably applied in this case. See Marcum v. State, 983 S.W.2d 762, 768 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, pet. ref'd).

We see no abuse of discretion here. The evidence was presented to the court through the testimony of the appellant. In addition, the evidence revealed that appellant lied about the incident to his probation officer. At a revocation hearing, the judge is the sole trier of fact and determines the credibility of witnesses. Ex parte Tarver, 725 S.W.2d 195, 198 (Tex. Crim. App.1986); Brumbalow v. State, 933 S.W.2d 298, 301 (Tex. App.--Waco 1996, pet. ref'd).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Alma L. L pez, Justice

Do Not Publish

1. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.1.