Tammy Lee Davila v. State of Texas ( 2009 )

Opinion filed August 6, 2009

Opinion filed August 6, 2009

                                                                        In The

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                 ____________

                                                          No. 11-08-00104-CR

                                                    __________

                                   TAMMY LEE DAVILA, Appellant

                                                             V.

                                        STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                                          On Appeal from the 29th District Court

                                                      Palo Pinto County, Texas

                                                   Trial Court Cause No. 10,890

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

Upon a plea of true to the State=s motion to adjudicate, the trial court adjudicated Tammy Lee Davila^[1] guilty of the offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.  The court assessed punishment at confinement for five years.  We affirm. 

In her sole issue on appeal, appellant contends that the judgment should be reformed because the trial court failed to give her adequate credit for time served.  The judgment indicates that appellant received credit for 130 days. Appellant asserts that she should be given credit for additional time spent in jail for offenses committed after she was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision and before she was adjudicated guilty and sentenced in this case. 

Pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03, ' 2(a) (Vernon Supp. 2008), a court shall give credit for time spent Ain jail for the case.@  The record does not show that the intervening incarcerations were for this aggravated assault case but, rather, were for separate offenses:  a driving while intoxicated offense in Navarro County and a theft offense in Tarrant County.  Thus, the record does not support appellant=s contention, and we cannot determine from this record that appellant is entitled to the additional credit.  See Steinocher v. State, 127 S.W.3d 160, 163 (Tex. App.CHouston [1st Dist.] 2003, pet. dism=d, untimely filed).  Appellant=s issue is overruled.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

RICK STRANGE

JUSTICE

August 6, 2009

Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.

---

^[1]We note that appellant=s name on the indictment is ATammy Lee Davila@ and that appellant=s name on the judgment adjudicating guilt is ATammy Gray Davila.@