James Michael Wayne Hobbs v State Of Oklahoma

RE-1999-1556

Filed: Feb. 1, 2001

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: State Of Oklahoma

Summary

James Michael Wayne Hobbs appealed his conviction for Injury to a Minor Child. The court affirmed the conviction and modified the sentence to time served. Judge Reta M. Strubhar dissented.

Decision

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT, by a five (5) to zero (0) vote, that the order of the District Court of Creek County revoking Appellant's suspended sentence in Case No. CF-97-14D is AFFIRMED. However, Appellant's sentence is modified to time served which includes satisfaction of all fines, fees, and costs associated with Appellant's conviction. IT IS SO ORDERED. WITNESS OUR HANDS AND THE SEAL OF THIS COURT this 1st day of February, 2001.

Issues

• Was there an abuse of discretion by the revocation court in revoking Mr. Hobbs' suspended sentence for failure to perform community service?
• Did the revocation of Mr. Hobbs' suspended sentence due to failure to pay costs, fines, and fees violate his rights given his family's sole source of income?
• Should the revocation of Mr. Hobbs' suspended sentence be reversed because it was based on a ground not stated in the application to revoke?

Findings

• the court erred in revoking Appellant's suspended sentence for failure to complete community service
• the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Appellant's suspended sentence for failure to pay costs, fines, and fees
• the revocation of Appellant's suspended sentence was affirmed but modified to time served

RE-1999-1556

Feb. 1, 2001

James Michael Wayne Hobbs

Appellant

v

State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

Appellant, represented by counsel, pled guilty to Injury to a Minor Child in Case No. CF-97-14D in the District Court of Creek County. Appellant was sentenced to three (3) years, all suspended. On August 11, 1998, the State filed an application to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence. On November 15, 1999, Appellant’s suspended sentence was revoked in full. From this Judgment and Sentence, Appellant appeals.

On appeal Appellant raised three propositions of error:

1. The revocation court abused its discretion by revoking Mr. Hobbs’ suspended sentence for failure to perform community service, which the original judge had ruled timely and satisfactorily completed;
2. The revocation of Mr. Hobbs’ suspended sentence, based on his failure to pay costs, fines and fees must be vacated because his family’s sole source of income was supplemental security income for his mental disability; and
3. The revocation of Mr. Hobbs’ suspended sentence should be reversed because the trial court revoked Appellant’s suspended sentence in its entirety based on a ground not stated in the application to revoke.

Pursuant to Rule 11.2(A)(2), Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2000) this appeal was automatically assigned to the Accelerated Docket of this Court. The propositions or issues were presented to this Court in oral argument January 18, 2001, pursuant to Rule 11.2(F). At the conclusion of oral argument, the parties were advised of the decision of this Court.

The State confesses that it was error for the District Court to revoke Appellant’s suspended sentence for failure to complete community service when file documentation indicates that Appellant satisfactorily completed his community service and was discharged from that obligation. As to Appellant’s claim that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his suspended sentence for failure to pay costs, fines and fees, we disagree. We do not find that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking Appellant’s suspended sentence, based on the appeal record presented to this Court. Harris v. State, 1989 OK CR 10, 1 3, 772 P.2d 1329, 1331; Crowels v. State, 1984 OK CR 29, 1 6, 675 P.2d 451, 453; Cooper v. State, 1979 OK CR 85, I 16, 599 P.2d 419, 422-23. We affirm the revocation of Appellant’s suspended sentence.

However, Appellant’s sentence is modified to time served which includes satisfaction of all fines, fees and costs associated with Appellant’s conviction.

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT, by a five (5) to zero (0) vote, that the order of the District Court of Creek County revoking Appellant’s suspended sentence in Case No. CF-97-14D is AFFIRMED. However, Appellant’s sentence is modified to time served which includes satisfaction of all fines, fees, and costs associated with Appellant’s conviction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

WITNESS OUR HANDS AND THE SEAL OF THIS COURT this 1st day of February, 2001.

GARY I LUMPKIN, Presiding Judge
CHARLES A. JOHNSON, Vice Presiding Judge
CHARLES S. CHAPEL, Judge
RETA M. STRUBHAR, Judge
STEVE LILE, Judge

ATTEST: Clerk

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 18
2. Harris v. State, 1989 OK CR 10, 1 3, 772 P.2d 1329, 1331
3. Crowels v. State, 1984 OK CR 29, 1 6, 675 P.2d 451, 453
4. Cooper v. State, 1979 OK CR 85, I 16, 599 P.2d 419, 422-23

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

No Oklahoma statutes found

Oklahoma Administrative Rules citations:

No Oklahoma administrative rules found.

U.S. Code citations:

No US Code citations found.

Other citations:

No other rule citations found.

Case citations:

• Harris v. State, 1989 OK CR 10, I 3, 772 P.2d 1329, 1331
• Crowels v. State, 1984 OK CR 29, I 6, 675 P.2d 451, 453
• Cooper v. State, 1979 OK CR 85, I 16, 599 P.2d 419, 422-23