187th District Court revokes supervision for three defendants; sentences range from termination to prison and state jail

Judge Stephanie Boyd, presiding over the 187th District Court in Bexar County, found violations of community supervision and entered adjudications or revocations in multiple cases during a docket call.

The court found a violation of condition number 4 true in State v. Samantha Nicole Ladone and followed the parties’ agreement: the court revoked community supervision, found Ladone guilty and sentenced her to two years in prison, to run concurrent with an existing parole revocation. The judge ordered restitution of $878.88 to Stephen Dingler and accepted the defendant’s waiver of appeal. The court stated, “The court will find violation of condition number 4 true.”

In State v. Guadalupe Rodriguez Jr., the court similarly found a violation of condition number 4 true. Rodriguez asked the court to follow the parties’ agreement, waived his right to appeal, and the court revoked supervision, found him guilty and sentenced him to two years in prison to run concurrent with his parole revocation.

In State v. Cara Michelle Clark, the court found Clark in violation of condition number 4 and granted the State’s motion. After hearing defense counsel describe the defendant’s recent hospitalizations and health issues, the court sentenced Clark to one year in a state jail facility with credit for time served and said it would reconsider that sentence if counsel provided medical documentation. The judge explained that, because the plea followed the court’s judgment, Clark had a limited right to appeal and, as a felony conviction, she is prohibited from owning or possessing weapons or ammunition.

Separately, the court handled a probation administrative matter for a defendant identified in the record as Mr. Hernandez: the judge announced that because the defendant’s mother paid the required fee, the defendant would be terminated satisfactorily from supervision, having completed the listed requirements.

Several defense attorneys and probation officers appeared at the hearings and the court repeated standard advisals about rights to appeal and collateral consequences for felony convictions.

The court’s actions were limited to the individual cases on the docket and did not establish changes to policy or wider probation practice.

Ending: The judge closed those matters and moved on to other docket items; the court instructed counsel to provide requested documentation in the Clark case if they wished the sentence reconsidered.