By
Robert O. Dawson
Bryant Smith Chair in Law
University of Texas School of Law
2001 Case Summaries 2000 Case Summaries 1999 Case Summaries
No proof juvenile court discouraged respondent
from testifying at modification hearing (99-3-17)
On July 8, 1999, the Texarkana Court of Appeals held that the juvenile
failed to prove that the statements made by the juvenile court at the
modification of disposition hearing were intended to and did discourage him from
testifying at that hearing.
99-3-17. In the Matter of T.E.B., UNPUBLISHED, No. 0o6-98-00116-CV, 1999 WL
459472, 1999 Tex.App.Lexis ____ (Tex.App.—Texarkana 7/8/99)[Texas Juvenile Law
(4th Edition 1996)].
Facts: T.E.B. appeals from an order modifying his disposition for delinquent
conduct and committing him to the Texas Youth Commission. We affirm.
T.E.B. was originally found to have engaged in delinquent conduct by unlawfully
carrying a weapon. At the disposition hearing, the court placed T.E.B. on
probation for six months. Before the expiration of the probation period, the
State moved to modify the disposition because T.E.B. had allegedly violated
several of the conditions of his probation. After a hearing, the trial court
found that T.E.B. had violated several of the conditions of his probation and
committed him to the Texas Youth Commission for an indeterminate period of time
not to exceed when he becomes twenty-one years of age.
Held: Affirmed.
Opinion Text: T.E.B. contends there is insufficient evidence to prove that he
violated some of the conditions of his probation, the court erred in
discouraging him from testifying in his own behalf, and the disposition is
disproportionately harsh and punitive.
T.E.B. does not challenge the allegation, and in fact he concedes on appeal,
that he violated one of the conditions of his probation by using marihuana.
Moreover, there was sufficient proof at the hearing that T.E.B. violated the
condition that he attend school regularly. Proof that the juvenile violated one
of the conditions of probation is sufficient to support a modification of the
disposition. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 54.05(f) (Vernon 1996); In re Rodriguez, 687
S.W.2d 421 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no writ).
T.E.B. contends the trial court improperly influenced him not to testify in his
own behalf. We have examined the colloquy between the trial court, T.E.B., and
T.E.B.'s counsel, and we conclude that T.E.B. and his counsel made a considered
and deliberate decision that T.E.B. not testify, and that the trial court
properly warned T.E.B. of the dangers of testifying, but did not influence him
in making his decision not to testify.
T.E.B. also asserts that the disposition committing him to the Texas Youth
Commission was disproportionately harsh and punitive. Because juvenile
commitments are for an indeterminate time, there is no way to compare whether it
was disproportionate to other dispositions for like offenses. Moreover, we were
advised at oral argument by both T.E.B.'s counsel and State's counsel that T.E.B.
has already been released from the Texas Youth Commission. Therefore, we find
that T.E.B. has not shown that the disposition was disproportionately harsh or
excessive, and this issue is moot. See In re Rodriguez, 687 S.W.2d at 423.