Frederick Earl Washington v. State
Frederick Earl Washington v. State
Opinion
The indictment alleged two previous felony convictions for the purpose of enhancing punishment. See id. § 12.42(d) (West Supp. 2001). On October 11, 2000, when Washington appeared before the district court and pleaded guilty to the alleged robbery, the parties agreed to reserve the enhancement issue for the sentencing hearing. With that, the court found Washington guilty and reset the cause for sentencing.
Washington returned to court on November 28. He did not enter a plea to the enhancement allegations, the State offered no evidence to prove the enhancement allegations, and the court did not find the enhancement allegations to be true. Under the circumstances, appellant's sentence was not subject to enhancement. In fact, the court's written judgment reflects that no finding was made regarding the enhancement allegations. Nevertheless, the district court assessed punishment at imprisonment for forty-five years.
Robbery is a second-degree felony. Id. § 29.02(b). Washington's forty-five year sentence exceeds that authorized for a second-degree felony. Id. § 12.33 (West 1994). A sentence not authorized by law is void. Levy v. State, 818 S.W.2d 801, 802 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Brown v. State, 14 S.W.3d 832, 833 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. ref'd); see Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221, 225 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Therefore, we affirm the district court's judgment as to the finding of guilt, but reverse that portion of the judgment imposing sentence and remand the cause for reassessment of punishment within the range prescribed for a second-degree felony.
__________________________________________
Bea Ann Smith, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed in Part, Reversed and Remanded in Part
Filed: September 20, 2001
Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.