Brandon Wayne Patterson v. The State of Texas

Summary

The Seventh Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the revocation of Brandon Wayne Patterson’s deferred adjudication community supervision, adjudication of guilt for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, and fifteen-year sentence. The court held that Patterson’s waiver of appeal barred his challenge to the voluntariness-related admonishments and, alternatively, that the trial court was not required to admonish him regarding a plea of not true or the punishment range at the revocation proceeding. The court also concluded that the record showed Patterson was aware of the applicable punishment range and the consequences of pleading true.

Holdings

1. A valid waiver of the right to appeal deprives the court of appeals of jurisdiction, except where the plea or waiver was not made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. Because Patterson did not challenge the voluntariness, knowledge, or intelligence of his pleas of true, the court could not review his non-sentencing complaint.
2. Due process principles applicable to revocation hearings do not require the trial court to admonish a defendant specifically that he may plead not true and thereby require the State to prove its allegations; Texas statutory admonishment requirements for guilty pleas do not strictly apply to revocation proceedings.
3. The statutory requirement to admonish a defendant about the punishment range arises at the initial plea before accepting a guilty plea and does not strictly apply at the time of revocation.
4. Any error in failing to provide the alleged punishment admonishment requires reversal only if it affected Patterson's substantial rights; Patterson did not establish harm because the written admonishments and his testimony showed personal awareness of the punishment range.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction to review Patterson's claim that he was not informed of his right to plead not true at the revocation proceeding despite his waiver of appeal.
2. Whether due process or Texas law required the trial court to admonish Patterson of his right to plead not true and require the State to prove the alleged supervision violations.
3. Whether the trial court was required to admonish Patterson of the applicable punishment range before he pleaded true to the allegations.
4. Whether any failure to provide the alleged punishment admonishment affected Patterson's substantial rights.

Disposition

affirmed