Opinion

Ryan Tony Davis v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Filed
Sep 26, 2008
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00600-CR

Ryan Tony Davis, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LAMPASAS COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 7975, HONORABLE C. W. DUNCAN JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Ryan Tony Davis appeals a judgment of conviction for burglary. In a previous

opinion dated June 13, 2008, we overruled appellant's first issue, by which he contended that the

trial court abused its discretion by overruling his motion for mistrial, but partially sustained

appellant's second and remaining issue, by which he contended that the trial court's restitution

order was not supported by the record. We abated the appeal for a restitution hearing and directed

the trial court to prepare and file findings of fact and conclusions of law specifying to whom and

in what amount restitution is to be made. See Barrera v. State , No. PD-1642-07 (Tex. Crim. App.

Sept. 10, 2008) (reaffirming authorities relied on in our earlier opinion).

A supplemental record has been filed containing the reporter's record of the

restitution hearing and a clerk's record containing the trial court's findings and conclusions. The

clerk's record also contains a copy of a reformed judgment of conviction specifying, consistent

with the trial court's findings, that appellant is to pay $5,000 in restitution to the Lampasas

Independent School District and $24,419.20 in restitution to the Texas Association of School Boards

Insurance Company.

We have examined the testimony at the restitution hearing and find that it supports

the trial court's findings and conclusions. At the hearing, appellant's counsel stated that he had

no objections to the findings. Having been given thirty days to do so, counsel has not filed a

supplemental brief.

We conclude that appellant's second issue was properly resolved by the trial court

following abatement. There being no further issues raised by appellant, the reformed judgment of

conviction is affirmed.

___________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: September 26, 2008

Do Not Publish

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.