Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Court Docket Determinations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge Stephanie Boyd accepts pleas and imposes sentences in multiple cases; one defendant remanded after no-show
Summary
At a February session of the 187th District Court, Judge Stephanie Boyd accepted pleas and imposed sentences in several criminal cases, set a contested hearing date for a bond matter, and remanded one defendant who failed to appear.
Judge Stephanie Boyd on Feb. 13 accepted pleas, imposed sentences and set future dates across multiple criminal matters on the court's docket.
The court handled a mix of guilty pleas, deferred adjudication orders and scheduling requests. Several defendants entered negotiated pleas and were sentenced that day; one defendant who failed to appear was remanded without bond.
Votes at a glance - State of Texas v. Armando Orozco Jr., case 2025CR001482W: Defendant waived indictment and the court accepted a negotiated plea to unauthorized use of a vehicle (state jail felony). The court adjudicated guilt and sentenced the defendant to the agreed punishment of nine months in a state jail facility, with restitution to be determined and no contact ordered for listed complainants. Judge Boyd noted that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived rights under Articles 1.051 and 26.03 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- State of Texas v. Manuel Herrera, case 2024CR012060: The court accepted a plea agreement on count 1. As agreed, the court sentenced Herrera to nine months in the Bexar County Jail, ordered a $1,000 fine (time and money to run concurrent), and set restitution, if any, to Barbara Doumit; no contact with Doumit was ordered.
- State of Texas v. Miguel Ayala (case number on docket): The court accepted the parties' plea recommendation and deferred a finding of guilt. The defendant was granted deferred adjudication/community supervision with terms including a $1,000 probated fine, conditions of reporting and other probation requirements as stated on the record.
- State of Texas v. Jessica Marie Garcia, case 2024CR012229 (and related): The defendant failed to appear for a scheduled 9 a.m. setting and, after the court confirmed the announcement and attempted contact, the state requested the defendant be remanded. The court ordered the defendant remanded without bond; the court said it would reconsider bond if the defendant appears.
What happened and why it matters The court's actions resolved several cases through negotiated pleas and deferred adjudication, removing those matters from trial dockets and imposing supervision or incarceration consistent with plea agreements. The remand for a no-show reiterates that failure to appear at a scheduled hearing can result in immediate custody decisions; the court instructed counsel about reconsideration if the defendant later appears.
Key quotes "Your plea deadline date has expired," Judge Stephanie Boyd told one defendant, underscoring the court's procedural time limits and the status of plea negotiations.
Additional context Several matters on this docket included the parties' stipulation to documentary evidence (states' exhibits) rather than live testimony. The court repeatedly confirmed that defendants understood and waived rights where pleas required it, citing the applicable admonishments and statutory provisions. In cases where restitution was uncertain, the court left restitution to be determined or scheduled hearings as needed.
Ending The court set contested and reset dates in multiple matters (for example, March 6 and February 24 were used for recalls and contested settings). Counsel and parties were instructed to confer with court staff about scheduling and discovery; the court reiterated the need to notify the court promptly if parties reach agreement before a scheduled contentious setting.
