 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Aiken v. State4/23/1999
ct appellant's contentions. We overrule appellant's seventh and eighth points of error.
In his fifth point of error, appellant contends the evidence is legally insufficient to support his felony DWI conviction. Generally, an appeal from an order revoking community supervision is limited to the propriety of the revocation order and does not include review of the original conviction. See Whetstone v. State, 786 S.W.2d 361, 363 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The original conviction may be collaterally attacked only if fundamental error occurred in the original conviction and rendered the proceeding absolutely void. See id.; Trcka v. State, 744 S.W.2d 677, 680 (Tex. App._Austin 1988, pet. ref'd). Appellant's attack on the sufficiency of the evidence to support the underlying conviction constitutes an impermissible collateral attack. See Christian v. State, 865 S.W.2d 198, 203 (Tex. App._Dallas 1993, pet. ref'd) (citing Armstrong v. State, 805 S.W.2d 791, 793 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)). Accordingly, we overrule appellant's fifth point of error.
We affirm the trial court's judgment.
MARK WHITTINGTON
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
|