OLIVIA ESTER HUDSON v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas.

OLIVIA ESTER HUDSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

No. 05-08-01136-CR

Decided: February 19, 2010

Before Justices Morris, O'Neill, and Fillmore

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice O'Neill

Appellant Olivia Ester Hudson appeals an order adjudicating her guilt.   In a single issue, appellant contends the State failed to exercise diligence in apprehending her after the State filed its motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt.   For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

In 1999, appellant pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine.   The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for three years.   In 2001, the State filed a motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt alleging appellant violated several conditions of probation.   A capias issued at that time.

Several years later, in 2008, appellant appeared before the trial court on the motion to adjudicate.   At that time, she pleaded true to the allegations in the motion.   The trial court adjudicated appellant guilty and assessed punishment at two years' confinement.   In her sole issue, appellant complains the State did not show it exercised diligence in executing the 2001 capias.   However, appellant did not complain of the State's diligence in the trial court.   The issue of lack of diligence must be raised by the defendant in the trial court to preserve it for appellate review.  Peacock v. State, 77 S.W.3d 285, 288 (Tex.Crim.App.2002);  Hardman v. State, 614 S.W.2d 123, 127 (Tex.Crim.App.1981).   Because appellant did not raise the diligence issue in the trial court, she presents nothing to review.   We resolve the sole issue against appellant and affirm the trial court's judgment.

MICHAEL J. O'NEILL JUSTICE

Copied to clipboard