Robert Galvan v. State of Texas--Appeal from 25th Judicial District Court of Guadalupe County

Annotate this Case
No. 04-00-00391-CR
Roberto GALVAN,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 95-0752-CR
Honorable Dwight E. Peschel, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 12, 2001

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

In 1995, Roberto Galvan pled guilty to sexual assault. The trial court deferred adjudication and placed Galvan on community supervision for a period of ten years. The trial court later adjudicated Galvan guilty and sentenced him to ten years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Galvan appeals, complaining the State failed to meet its burden of proof at the adjudication hearing.

The trial court's determination to proceed with the adjudication of guilt is one of non-reviewable discretion. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2000) ("defendant is entitled to a hearing limited to the determination by the court of whether it proceeds with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge. No appeal may be taken from this determination.") Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to review Galvan's points. See Connolly v. State, 983 S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) ("an appellant whose deferred adjudication probation has been revoked and who has been adjudicated guilty of the original charge, may not raise on appeal contentions of error in the adjudication of guilt process."); Phynes v. State, 828 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (court of appeals should dismiss appeal that claims right to counsel was violated at adjudication proceeding). We therefore dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Do not publish

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.