X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:On Aug. 14, 1987, Billy Noyola committed the felony offense of burglary of a habitation. In January 1988, Noyola pleaded guilty and entered a plea of true to the enhancement paragraph in the indictment, which alleged that Noyola had previously been convicted of burglary of a habitation in 1984. The trial judge found Noyola guilty. After determining that the enhancement allegation was true, the judge sentenced Noyola to 18 years of imprisonment. Noyola did not appeal. Noyola committed the offense of aggravated assault on a peace officer, in violation of Texas Penal Code �22.02, on Sept. 27, 1992. On Dec. 10, 1992, a trial court convicted Noyola of this offense and sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment, to be served concurrently with the remainder of his 18-year sentence for burglary of a habitation. Although the trial court’s judgment designated the offense as a second-degree felony, the state, after a thorough review of the records in that cause, noted that a trial court actually convicted Noyola of the third-degree-felony offense of aggravated assault on a peace officer. The Court of Criminal Appeals’ review of the record in this opinion confirmed that Noyola’s conviction was for a third-degree-felony offense. Authorities paroled Noyola on April 10, 2000. On April 5, 2004, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) issued a pre-revocation warrant for Noyola’s arrest. Authorities later revoked Noyola’s parole. After exhausting his administrative remedies, Noyola filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus challenging TDCJ’s refusal to credit his time on parole to his 18-year sentence under �508.283(c) of the Texas Government Code. Noyola contended that TDCJ improperly denied him credit for time served on his 1992 conviction for aggravated assault on a peace officer. When authorities revoked Noyola’s parole, they confined him pursuant to the 10-year sentence. Noyola recently completed his 10-year sentence. The fact that Noyola discharged his 10-year sentence, the Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) stated, does not render his time-credit claim moot, because he is still confined under his 18-year sentence for burglary of a habitation. The state argued that Noyola’s 1992 conviction for aggravated assault on a peace officer in the third degree rendered him ineligible for street-time credit. Noyola is ineligible, according to the state, because he was ineligible for release on mandatory supervision under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 42.18, �8(c), the statute in effect when he committed the offense of aggravated assault on a peace officer. Agreeing with the state, the trial judge recommended that the CCA deny relief stating: “Based upon the law in effect at the time Applicant committed the offense of aggravated assault on a peace officer, the Court recommends denial of all relief requested in the application for writ of habeas corpus.” The CCA filed and set the case to decide which version of the mandatory supervision statute determines an inmate’s eligibility for street-time credit under �508.283(c): the statute in effect at the time of the revocation or the statute in effect at the time the inmate committed the offense for which he is confined. HOLDING:The CCA granted Noyola’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Section 508.283(c), commonly referred to as the “street-time credit statute,” applies to all revocations of parole and mandatory supervision that occur on or after Sept. 1, 2001. When authorities revoked Noyola’s parole, the statute read in part as follows: “If the parole, mandatory supervision, or conditional pardon of a person other than a person described by Section 508.149(a) is revoked, the person may be required to serve the remaining portion of the sentence on which the person was released.” Therefore, under �508.283(c), an inmate may be entitled to credit for time served while released on parole or mandatory supervision if: 1. the inmate is not a person described by �508.149(a); and 2. on the date that authorities issue the pre-revocation warrant or summons initiating the revocation process, the remaining portion of the inmate’s sentence is less than the time the inmate spent on parole. The remaining portion of the inmate’s sentence, the court stated, refers to that part of the sentence remaining at the release date, less time spent on parole. Section 508.283(c), the court further stated, serves to “lessen the sentence of non-violent parole violators (versus violent parole violators) whose time spent out on parole exceeded their remaining sentence.” Section 508.149(a), the court stated, sets out a list of offenses that render an inmate ineligible for mandatory supervision. Noyola’s 1992 conviction for aggravated assault on a peace officer in the third degree, the court found, was not one of the enumerated offenses in the version of �508.149(a) in effect at the time of Noyola’s revocation. Also, Noyola’s offense was not a precursor offense to the first- and second-degree felony offenses listed in �508.149(a) when authorities revoked his parole. Finally, the remaining portion of Noyola’s sentence was less than the amount of time Noyola spent on parole. Thus, the court granted Noyola’s petition for habeas corpus relief, because the version of �508.149(a) in effect at the time of Noyola’s revocation controlled Noyola’s eligibility for street-time credit under �508.283(c). As a result, the court found Noyola eligible to receive street-time credit for the period of time he spent on parole between 2002 and 2004. The CCA denied Noyola’s remaining claims and ordered TDCJ to credit Noyola’s 18-year sentence for burglary of a habitation accordingly. OPINION:Keasler, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous court.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.