Michael Dewayne Jefferson v. The State of TexasAppeal from 396th District Court of Tarrant County (concurring and dissenting memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________ No. 07-13-00229-CR ________________________ MICHAEL DEWAYNE JEFFERSON, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 396th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1274891D; Honorable George W. Gallagher, Presiding November 20, 2013 CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. I concur with the majority s decision to modify the judgment of the trial court to delete a portion of the attorney s fees assessed and to affirm the judgment as modified; however, I respectfully dissent because I believe the majority incorrectly limits that modification to the attorney s fees assessed when Appellant s deferred adjudication community supervision was revoked. The judgment of the trial court orders that court-appointed attorney s fees in the amount of $2,050 be added to the financial obligations of Appellant, Michael Dewayne Jefferson. Relying upon Wiley v. State, No. PD-1728-12, 2013 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1464, at *21-22 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 25, 2013) and Riles v. State, No. 07-12-00386CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 12446, at *7-9 (Tex. App. Amarillo Oct. 7, 2013, no pet. h.), the majority reduces the amount of those fees by only $1,150 because it finds that $900 of that amount was for fees assessed when adjudication of Appellant s guilt was originally deferred and he was placed on community supervision. By differentiating between attorney s fees assessed when Appellant was originally placed on deferred adjudication and fees assessed when that community supervision was revoked, I believe the majority incorrectly applies Wiley. Because I would modify the judgment to delete the entire sum of $2,050, I respectfully dissent. See Riles v. State, No. 07-1200386-CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 12446, at *9-18 (Tex. App. Amarillo Oct. 7, 2013, no pet. h.) (Pirtle, J. dissenting). Patrick A. Pirtle Justice Do not publish. 2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.