Lamar a Williams v. State

Opinion issued October 21, 2010 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO.  01-08-00796-CR ——————————— Lamar a. Williams, Appellant V. The State of Texas, Appellee On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 964392 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Lamar Williams, was indicted for sexual assault of a child. Appellant pled guilty to a reduced charge of indecency with a child by exposure. The trial court deferred adjudication and placed appellant on community supervision for five years. Subsequently, appellant violated certain conditions of his community supervision. Appellant pleaded true to the violation of his community supervision. The trial court adjudicated guilt and sentenced appellant to four years’ confinement at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. Appellant filed an appeal claiming errors relative to his underlying guilt. In two issues, he contends his plea was involuntary because (1) his federal and state constitutional rights against self-incrimination were violated and (2) the trial court should have considered appellant’s defense based on his claim of marriage to the complainant. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Analysis A defendant placed on deferred adjudication community supervision must challenge the deferred adjudication when originally imposed, not after the trial court revokes community supervision. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 23(b) (Vernon Supp. 2010); Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661–62 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Satterwhite v. State, 36 S.W.3d 145, 149 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d). To the degree an appeal of the revocation of defendant’s community supervision relates to the original deferred adjudication, the appellate court has no jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s complaints. See Manuel, 994 S.W.2d at 662; Satterwhite, 36 S.W.3d at 149; Brisco v. State, No. 01-00-00762-CR, 2002 WL 595075, at *5 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] April 18, 2002, pet. ref’d) (mem. op.) (holding appellate court had no jurisdiction over appellant’s motion for new trial challenging the voluntariness of his plea filed after the trial court revoked his community supervision). Appellant challenged his underlying guilt only after the trial court revoked his community supervision and seven months after the deferred adjudication was first imposed. “[A] defendant placed on deferred adjudication community supervision may raise issues relating to the original plea proceeding . . . only in appeals taken when deferred adjudication community supervision is first imposed.” Manuel, 994 S.W.2d at 661–62. This Court has no jurisdiction to consider his appeal. See id. Conclusion We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Sam Nuchia Justice Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Massengale and Nuchia.[1] Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). [1] The Honorable Sam Nuchia, Senior Justice, Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, participating by assignment.