Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Revocation And Treatment topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Court finds violations in Payne case, orders FACT evaluation and places defendant on probated sentence

Bexar County Court (docket) · March 31, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

In a contested motion-to-revoke hearing the court found violations, weighed inpatient treatment against FACT intensive-case management and imposed a suspended three-year sentence with four years of probation conditioned on FACT evaluation in custody, random UAs and field visits.

The court addressed a motion to revoke community supervision for Daryl (Darryl) Payne after the state alleged failures to comply with supervision conditions and probation reporting. Defense counsel urged intensive case management by the FACT team and told the court the defendant’s difficulties were closely tied to medication access and housing stability.

"What's gonna end up happening is there's gonna be some issue with his medication. He's not gonna take it. He's gonna disappear," the judge said in a summary of prior patterns, noting the revolving nature of noncompliance and relapse. Defense counsel said FACT could provide frequent home visits and intensive support if Payne qualified.

After considering the parties’ positions and recent evaluations, the court found violations true and announced it would find the defendant guilty, then suspend execution of a three-year prison sentence and place Payne on four years of probation. Conditions include regular reporting (Zoom or in person), random UA testing, proof of SSI within 45 days of release, FACT-team evaluation while in custody, field visits and a prohibition on residing in households with minors. The court ordered that if FACT does not accept him, the parties will pursue inpatient treatment and a hearing on the appropriateness of that alternative.

Defense counsel argued for FACT screening and community supports; the state argued inpatient treatment and emphasized public-safety concerns. The judge framed the disposition as balancing the likelihood of compliance on probation versus incapacitation through prison and emphasized follow-up monitoring to protect community safety.