Roy Cletdell Robinson v. the State of Texas
Docket 06-25-00122-CR
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Court
- Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)
- Type
- Lead Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Docket
- 06-25-00122-CR
Appeal from a revocation hearing in a state-jail-felony evading-arrest case challenging revocation of community supervision
Summary
The Texas court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s revocation of Roy Cletdell Robinson’s five-year community supervision for evading arrest with a prior conviction. Robinson argued the evidence was insufficient to support revocation and that the trial court violated his due process rights by relying on hearsay probation officer testimony without a business records affidavit. The appellate court applied the same standards and analysis used in Robinson’s companion appeal, found no reversible error, and concluded the trial court properly revoked supervision. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed.
Issues Decided
- Whether the evidence presented at the revocation hearing was sufficient to support revocation of community supervision.
- Whether the trial court violated the defendant’s due process rights by relying on hearsay testimony from a probation officer who lacked personal knowledge and by admitting that testimony without a business records affidavit.
Court's Reasoning
The appellate court applied the same legal standard and analysis it used in Robinson’s companion appeal and concluded the trial court did not err in revoking community supervision. The court found the record contained sufficient evidence to support revocation and determined Robinson did not preserve his due process complaint about the probation officer’s hearsay testimony, so appellate relief was not warranted. Those findings supported affirming the trial court’s judgment.
Parties
- Appellant
- Roy Cletdell Robinson
- Appellee
- The State of Texas
- Judge
- Charles van Cleef
Key Dates
- Date Submitted
- 2026-03-25
- Date Decided
- 2026-04-24
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consider further appellate options
If parties want to continue challenging the revocation, they should consult counsel about seeking rehearing in the appellate court or filing a petition for review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, observing applicable deadlines.
- 2
Consult defense counsel about remedial actions
Robinson should speak with his attorney to understand the practical consequences of the affirmed revocation (e.g., custody, credit for time served) and any administrative steps required.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision to revoke Robinson’s community supervision and reinstate his sentence.
- Why was his supervision revoked?
- The court concluded there was sufficient evidence presented at the revocation hearing to justify revocation, although the opinion references the companion appeal for detailed factual analysis.
- Did the court find a due process violation?
- No; the court said Robinson failed to preserve his objection about hearsay probation-officer testimony and therefore did not grant relief on that claim.
- What happens next for Robinson?
- Because the appellate court affirmed, the trial court’s revocation stands and any imposed incarceration or other consequences from revocation remain in effect unless further relief is sought.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
In the
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-25-00122-CR
ROY CLETDELL ROBINSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 202nd District Court
Bowie County, Texas
Trial Court No. 25F0042-202
Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Roy Robinson, a/k/a Roy Cletdell Robinson, Jr., pled guilty to evading arrest or detention
with a previous conviction, a state jail felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.04(b)(1)
(Supp.). The trial court sentenced Robinson to two years in a state jail facility, running
concurrently with the sentence assessed in his companion case, but suspended the sentences in
favor of placing Robinson on community supervision for five years.1 The State later moved to
revoke Robinson’s community supervision, alleging that he violated several of its terms. After a
hearing, the trial court revoked Robinson’s community supervision.
Via a single, consolidated brief, Robinson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence
supporting all grounds for revocation and alleges his due process rights were violated because
the trial court “rel[ied] exclusively on hearsay testimony from a probation officer who lacked
personal knowledge and without a business records affidavit.”
We addressed Robinson’s arguments in detail in our opinion addressing his appeal in
appellate cause number 06-25-00121-CR, and we apply the same legal standard and analysis
here as we did in his companion case.
We determine that the trial court did not err in revoking Robinson’s community
supervision. We likewise determine that Robinson failed to preserve error regarding his due
process issue.
1
In his companion appellate cause number 06-25-00121-CR, Robinson appeals his conviction for possession of less
than one gram of cocaine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(b) (Supp).
2
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Charles van Cleef
Justice
Date Submitted: March 25, 2026
Date Decided: April 24, 2026
Do Not Publish
3