Charles Leland Jones v. The State of Texas Appeal from 272nd District Court of Brazos County (memorandum opinion by chief justice quinn)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-15-00362-CR CHARLES JONES, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 272nd District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 10-02173-CRF-272, Honorable Harold R. Towslee, Presiding March 22, 2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. Charles Jones appeals from a judgment revoking his community supervision and sentencing him to imprisonment for driving while intoxicated. He had previously been found guilty and sentenced. However, the trial court suspended imposition of the sentence and placed him on community supervision. After appellant had been stopped and arrested for driving while intoxicated again, the State moved to revoke his supervision. The trial court granted the motion and sentenced appellant to 10 years imprisonment. We affirm. The State alleged multiple grounds in its motion to justify the revocation of appellant's community supervision. Several pertained to appellant's operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol on or about October 14, 2014. Others included appellant's use of marijuana on February 9, 2013 and his operation of a motor vehicle unequipped with an ignition interlock system on October 14, 2014. The trial court found that appellant had violated "the conditions of community supervision as set forth in the State's Original Motion to Revoke Community Supervision . . . ." Before us, appellant attacks only those findings pertaining to his operation of a motor vehicle on October 14th while intoxicated and does so by contending that evidence of the blood draw (used to illustrate his intoxication) should have been suppressed. Assuming arguendo that such evidence should have been suppressed, we find the matter harmless. Because this appeal was transferred from the Tenth Court of Appeals, we are bound to use the precedent of that court were applicable. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3. Per that court's precedent, ". . . proof of any one of the alleged violations of the conditions of community supervision is sufficient to support a revocation order." Broussard v. State, No. 10-14-00285-CR, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 5736, at *7 (Tex. App.—Waco June 4, 2015, pet. ref'd) (mem. op., not designated for publication), citing, Smith v. State, 286 S.W.3d 333, 342 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Having found "true" the allegations concerning marijuana usage and the absence of an ignition interlock system, the trial court had basis to revoke appellant's community supervision. This is correct irrespective of whether the State properly drew appellant's blood to establish his intoxication from alcohol. See Moore v. State, No. 10-12-00275-CR, 2014 Tex. App. 2 LEXIS 1920, at *16 (Tex. App.—Waco February 20, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (concluding that the court need not review the complaint urged by the appellant because other grounds warranted the revocation of appellant's community supervision). Moreover, appellant did not question the legitimacy of those two grounds on appeal. Thus, we overrule appellant's issue and affirm the trial court's judgment. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 3
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.
