252nd District Court orders competency restoration, denies bond reduction in murder case and records multiple pleas and sentences

The 252nd District Court on Jan. 8 heard a packed docket that included findings that three defendants are not competent to stand trial and must be sent for inpatient competency restoration, a denial of a bond reduction request in a murder case, substitution of court‑appointed counsel in a separate case, and multiple pleas and sentencing outcomes.

The court found Labisha Spooner not competent to stand trial and ordered inpatient competency restoration. Judge (identified in the transcript only as the court) said a physician certificate and a forensic psychiatry report show Spooner “is still not competent to stand trial” and directed that she be sent back “to the appropriate facility for a period of not to exceed 120 days” for competency restoration.

The court made comparable determinations in two other matters. Christian Kane was found not competent to stand trial based on a December 9, 2024 report and ordered to inpatient restoration for up to 120 days. Robert Davis was found not competent based on a December 17, 2024 report and was likewise ordered to inpatient competency restoration for a period not to exceed 120 days.

In a separate competency matter, the court found Jacob Cozad competent to stand trial after receiving a packet from a restoration facility dated Oct. 28, 2024. The court reset Cozad’s cases for a short continuance to allow defense counsel and the district attorney to discuss plea options.

Bond hearing in murder case denied

At a bond hearing for Devin Thomas (cause number 24 DCCR 1588), the court denied a defense motion to reduce a $1,000,000 bond. Attorney Wilkerson argued Thomas and his family could not raise the existing bond and asked the court for a reduction. Prosecutor Nichols opposed the reduction, citing the nature of the charged offense and allegations that Thomas fled to Louisiana and had a prior out-of-state robbery conviction. The court said it had reviewed the probable cause affidavit and the underlying facts and denied the motion, leaving the bond at $1,000,000.

Substitution of counsel, trial scheduling

The court granted Attorney Wilkerson’s motion to withdraw as counsel for defendant Lenny Lade, citing a breakdown in communication between Wilkerson and Lade. The judge discharged Wilkerson, appointed new counsel, and moved Lade’s trial from jury selection the following Monday to a review docket so newly appointed counsel can prepare.

Pleas and sentencing outcomes

Several defendants entered pleas or were sentenced during the docket. Notable outcomes included: - Charles Compton: Entered pleas of true to counts 16 and 18 on a revocation motion; the court found the counts true and sentenced Compton under an agreement (the transcript shows adherence to an agreed disposition on those counts). - Reginald Grandison: Entered pleas of true to counts alleging probation violations; the court revoked probation and sentenced Grandison to 12 months in state jail, indicating the sentence should run concurrently with federal custody to the extent possible. - Kenthea Handy: Previously pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. The court accepted the plea, ordered a 2‑year state jail sentence probated for 5 years, and required completion of the 90‑day inpatient ISF substance‑abuse track as a condition of probation. - Rocky Bradley: Entered guilty pleas to burglary of a habitation (second‑degree felony) and burglary of a building (state‑jail felony). The court sentenced Bradley to an 8‑year term in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice institutional division on the habitation count, and 12 months in the state‑jail prison on the building count; the sentences will run concurrently. - Daniel Leatherwood: Entered a guilty plea to aggravated robbery and, pursuant to the agreement, was sentenced to 20 years in TDCJ; the court made an affirmative deadly‑weapon finding and directed the sentence to run concurrently with an identified federal sentence.

Other docket business

The court handled a mix of plea paperwork issues, pre‑sentence report requests and continuances, a dismissal of one cause (24 DCCR 1514) for lack of a witness, and routine admonishments that convictions will affect firearm eligibility under Texas law. The judge repeatedly reminded defendants that the court would order competency restoration where required and that the absence of a local outpatient competency restoration program meant inpatient restoration was necessary in several cases.

Why this matters

Competency findings and restoration orders pause criminal prosecutions while mental‑health treatment is provided; the court’s determinations that inpatient restoration is required in multiple cases will affect detention status and scheduling for those defendants. The denial of bond reduction in the murder case keeps the defendant detained pending further proceedings. Multiple guilty pleas and sentences resolved cases that otherwise would proceed to trial, altering custody status and sentencing outcomes for the defendants involved.

The docket contained many additional routine and case‑specific rulings and removals; defendants who received probation were given conditions including completion of treatment programs where the court deemed them necessary.