Judge in 252nd District Court accepts multiple pleas, orders inpatient treatment after competency findings

The 252nd District Court, presided over by the judge hearing the May docket, processed a string of pleas and procedural resets on May 13, 2026, accepting guilty pleas, finding multiple defendants’ pleas voluntarily entered, and scheduling follow-up sentencing after pre-sentence reports.

The judge opened by taking a plea-adoption and sentencing matter in cause number 25DCCR1253 for Aaron Morris. “I’m going to find that you previously entered your plea guilty, freely and voluntarily,” the judge said, and in accordance with the agreement found Morris guilty of driving while intoxicated (third or more). The court suspended a 10-year institutional sentence and placed Morris on 10 years’ probation, ordered enrollment in a safety program and the JCDI program, and required 10 days of immediate jail time as the statutorily mandated upfront period.

Across the docket the court repeatedly accepted pleas and found defendants competent to proceed, but often reset sentencing to allow probation to prepare or update pre-sentence investigation reports. For several defendants the court accepted plea agreements that included deferred probation and fines; for example, the court accepted a plea in cause 25DCCR0170 and deferred proceedings with five years’ probation and a $500 fine under the agreed disposition, and in other cases reduced bonds or set personal bonds pending pre-sentence work.

The court also addressed competency and mental‑health determinations. After reviewing multiple forensic and psychiatric evaluations, the judge found that Mr. Sells remained not competent to stand trial and that his condition was severe and persistent. “I am going to find at this time that Mr. Sells is not competent to stand trial,” the judge stated, and ordered inpatient competency restoration treatment at an appropriate facility for a period not to exceed one year under civil commitment; the court directed that probation and treatment providers notify the court immediately if competency is restored earlier.

Several motion-to-revoke matters and allegations of new offenses led the court to set hearings rather than immediately revoke probation. In one revocation setting the court found counts true for a defendant on multiple technical violations and reset sentencing to permit witnesses and a probation update; in other matters the court declined to accept plea agreements immediately where additional outstanding charges or new offenses required further review.

The judge repeatedly admonished defendants about the consequences of violating probation and emphasized limits on firearm possession after conviction. The court handed defendants the trial‑court certification of appeal waiver and a written admonishment explaining that, because of their convictions, they are ineligible under Texas law to possess firearms or ammunition. In at least one case the court made an affirmative deadly‑weapon finding when accepting a plea to aggravated robbery and imposed an eight‑year sentence in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections.

Procedural resets were common. Defense counsel frequently asked the court for brief continuances to review newly produced discovery or to allow probation to complete reports; the court granted resets where appropriate and set follow‑up dates on the regular docket. The judge urged counsel to provide any material they want the court to consider at least seven days before the scheduled sentencing hearing so witnesses need not be subpoenaed unnecessarily.

What happens next: the court left many matters set for future sentencing or hearings after probation prepares updated pre‑sentence reports. The competency‑treatment order requires inpatient placement and a report back to the court, and the scheduling clerk will notify parties of the next docket dates.

Context and limits: the article summarizes the court’s on‑record statements and formal outcomes from the docket. It does not speculate about matters not entered on the record or about decisions that were reset for later hearings.