Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Sentencing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Court finds Eduardo Porter guilty and sentences him to prison following plea
Summary
After a plea hearing in the 187th Judicial District Court, Judge Stephanie Boyd found Eduardo Porter guilty on two counts and imposed prison terms, an affirmative deadly-weapon finding and conditions including no contact and restitution.
In the 187th Judicial District Court the defendant Eduardo Porter entered pleas and the court imposed prison sentences following the parties' plea proceedings.
Prosecutors recited the plea bargain in court and the defendant acknowledged his plea. The state read a factual summary of a driving and confrontation incident that culminated in a bullet hole in a complainant's truck. The court noted the plea paperwork and the pre-sentence evaluation and then announced a finding of guilt and sentences.
"In counts 1 and counts 2, the court will find you guilty. The court will sentence you to 3 years in the prison in each count," Judge Stephanie Boyd said on the record. The court ordered an affirmative finding that a deadly weapon was used in each count, ordered no contact with named complainants, and directed restitution, if any, to the complainant identified in the plea documents.
Court minutes reflect that the plea paperwork included a provision for a fine and other standard conditions; during the plea recital the prosecutor stated the plea agreement referenced a $2,000 fine and a negotiated punishment amount, although the court announced the specific 3-year terms it imposed.
The defendant acknowledged signing the court's advisals, including the court certification about appellate rights. The court recorded that defendant waived his right to appeal under the plea agreement and warned the defendant that after a felony conviction he may not possess weapons or ammunition.
The record shows the court also recommended or ordered continued involvement with treatment and community services referenced in the presentence assessment; details on reporting or service placement were left to the probation and treatment providers.
