Grinstead, Teresa Lynn

In the Court of Criminal
Appeals of Texas
══════════
No. WR-92,482-01
══════════

EX PARTE TERESA LYNN GRINSTEAD,
Applicant

═══════════════════════════════════════
On Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus
In Cause No. F44452-A in the 413th District Court
From Johnson County
═══════════════════════════════════════

YEARY, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Applicant pled guilty to two counts of obtaining a controlled
substance by fraud, a third-degree felony. TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE
§ 481.129(a). The maximum period of community supervision authorized
for her case was five years. See former TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 42.12
§ 3(b)(2)(B) (2010) (recodified as TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 42A.053 §
(d)(2)(B)(ii)) (“(b) In a felony case . . . the maximum period of community
GRINSTEAD – 2

supervision is . . . (2) five years, for the following third degree felonies .
. . (B) a third degree felony under Chapter 481, Health and Safety
Code.”).
Still, the trial court placed her on community supervision for ten
years. Applicant now claims that the trial court lacked jurisdiction when
it revoked her community supervision more than five years into her ten-
year supervision period. The Court agrees, and so it grants relief,
invoking the Court’s decision in Ex parte Lozoya, 666 S.W.3d 618 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2023). Majority Opinion at 2–3.
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Lozoya, I
respectfully dissent to the Court’s decision. See 666 S.W.3d at 631
(Yeary, J., dissenting) (“In my view, Applicant should be expected to
have preserved the claim by objection in the trial court and, even if not
timely preserved there, at least to have raised it on direct appeal from
the revocation proceeding.”).

FILED: September 13, 2023
DO NOT PUBLISH