In the
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-26-00018-CR
SARIAH GARCIA, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 396th District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1655158
Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rambin
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Sariah Garcia appeals1 four judgments adjudicating guilt, but her combined brief asserts
error in only two of them.2 The State concedes the errors in the trial court’s judgments in trial
court cause numbers 1655158 and 1736179. We therefore modify the trial court’s judgment here
in trial court cause number 1655158 and affirm as modified.
All four of the trial court’s judgments result from a combined “true but” hearing where
Garcia pled true to violating terms of her deferred adjudication community supervision in each
case but testified in the hope of avoiding incarceration. After hearing Garcia’s testimony, as well
as testimony from witnesses called by the State, the trial court adjudicated guilt and pronounced
sentence in each of Garcia’s cases. In all four of her cases, the trial court’s judgments reflect that
the sentences are to run concurrently.
Garcia asserts that there is error in two of the trial court’s judgments because the trial
court orally-pronounced sentences of six months in state jail for each of the two state-jail
felonies, but the written judgments impose sentences of two years’ confinement. The State
agrees and asks that the judgments at issue be modified by this Court to reflect the correct
sentences as orally pronounced by the trial court.
1
This appeal was transferred to this Court from the Second Court of Appeals pursuant to a Texas Supreme Court docket equalization order. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (Supp.). Accordingly, we apply the precedent of the Second Court of Appeals in deciding this case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.
2
In this memorandum opinion, we address Garcia’s challenge to the trial court’s written-imposed sentence in trial court cause number 1655158. In her companion appellate cause numbers 06-26-00019-CR and 06-26-00020-CR, Garcia does not assert any challenge. In her companion appellate cause number 06-26-00021-CR, Garcia challenges the trial court’s written-imposed sentence in trial court cause number 1736179.
2
“As a general rule, when the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written judgment
vary, the oral pronouncement controls.” Ette v. State, 559 S.W.3d 511, 516 (Tex. Crim. App.
2018). “The solution in those cases in which the oral pronouncement and the written judgment
conflict is to reform the written judgment to conform to the sentence that was orally
pronounced.” Thompson v. State, 108 S.W.3d 287, 290 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
This appeal concerns Garcia’s conviction regarding a state-jail felony offense of burglary
of a building. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 30.02(a), (c)(1) (Supp.). Garcia’s appeal in her
companion appellate cause number 06-26-00021-CR concerns Garcia’s conviction regarding a
state-jail felony offense of credit card or debit card abuse. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN.
§ 32.31(b), (d). During sentencing the trial court stated, “On [each of] the [two] state jail cases,
the sentence[s] will be six months state jail.” In this case, we modify the trial court’s judgment
by removing the “2 YEARS” confinement in state jail to correctly reflect a sentence of “SIX
MONTHS” confinement in state jail.
Accordingly, in this case, we affirm the trial court’s judgment, as modified.
Jeff Rambin
Justice
Date Submitted: August 11, 2026
Date Decided: August 12, 2026
Do Not Publish
3