James Orion Bywater v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 181st District Court of Potter County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-02-0526-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL E JULY 25, 2003 ______________________________ JAMES ORION BYWATER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY; NO. 43,460-B; HON. JOHN B. BOARD, PRESIDING _______________________________ Memorandum Opinion _______________________________ Before JOHNSON, C.J., QUINN, J., and BOYD, S.J. 1 James Orion Bywater (appellant) appeals from a judgment convicting him of the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. Via a single issue, appellant contends that the trial court erred by entering a cumulation order stacking his sentences for this offense with another levied in a cause styled State v. Bywater, No. 43,459-B. This is allegedly error because the offenses underlying both causes arose from the same criminal episode and 1 John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Re t.), Seventh C ourt of Appeals, sitting by assignment. Tex. Gov t Code Ann. §75.00 2(a)(1) (V erno n Su pp. 2003 ). the causes were tried in the same criminal action. See TEX . PENAL CODE ANN . §3.03(a) (Vernon 2003) (stating that sentences generally shall run concurrently when the accused is found guilty of more than one offense arising out of the same criminal episode prosecuted in a single criminal action). In its appellee s brief, the State conceded the issue and error. When such error occurs, the appropriate remedy is to reform the judgment and delete the cumulation order. Robbins v. State, 914 S.W.2d 582, 584 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Accordingly, we reform the judgment of the trial court and delete all reference suggesting that the sentence in Cause No. 43,460-B is to run cumulative to, consecutive to, or in any way after completion of the sentence in Cause No. 43,459-B. The judgment is affirmed as reformed. Brian Quinn Justice Do not publish. 2
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.
