[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},"mediaId",6124639,"mediaKeyId","2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328","parentId",2680982,"title","Judge issues sentences and probation decisions in multiple cases, including 6-year term for revoked probation","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",11064000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328&start=11064&end=11064","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328/thumbnail_11064000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6124639/Texas/Judge-issues-sentences-and-probation-decisions-in-multiple-cases-including-6-year-term-for-revoked-probation","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6124639-782a1d4699b2dd9706040f92f8e9fa27/orig.mp4?Expires=1770920540&Signature=YXPemEwQ45lK81TkrpMb9lPHq53cMsaHW0xUkqx5dihiuykwXn3midx4~EN~L9zWSYKXnbAYf-L1NNcGIwiATj5-id~FdQX8KlFccGymlmA8zS3bWu~~HmiYnLHXQTcxRILr1n5IB4JpqJ6pqwLQgURYSnA8l8D2KvG4mRFtYcYzfeiIgwRYBn0aDbS2GOFGa0mYwBEYoaNWu2UuJwKpej8hQoZgVABhY5e9km9sg09eBurtLLcEUOxSXws96ZYTcAE8n9Fxm0gqzm37GeZ-eRBzJNJUQ9fwkEQWct~Ct8gEz0f4lYGbGsHYL7sFpzpJQYq3Ho07PaHCIMcJ1DxzzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-19T05:46:32.133Z","article","The presiding judge issued multiple sentencing and probation rulings during the docket session, including imprisonment and extended probation with treatment conditions.

Anthony Mendoza had his probation revoked after the court found violations and was sentenced to six years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The court found Mendoza’s pleas of true to counts in a motion to revoke and said, “I’m going to find that you entered your pleas of true to counts 1 through 13 freely and voluntarily. Find those counts true. Find sufficient evidence to revoke your probation and at this time revoke your probation. Sentence you to 6 years in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections.” The judge instructed the clerk to provide Mendoza with certification of his right to appeal.

Dante Caddy, who had earlier pleaded true to violations while on deferred adjudication for burglary of a habitation, asked for reconsideration. The judge initially discussed a potential six-year sentence but identified a previously negotiated cap. After reviewing the record the court said, “So there was a cap of 4 years. So I'm going to withdraw what I said about the 6 years. I'm going to sentence you to a term of 4 years in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Corrections.” The judge accepted the plea agreement’s cap and noted it waived the defendant’s right to appeal.

Christopher Curtis Ray was sentenced after entering an open guilty plea to a third-degree felony forgery of a financial instrument. The judge declined probation and imposed a five-year term in TDCJ, noting that the state had opposed probation given Ray’s prior record. The court issued the trial-court certification and the written firearm-admonishment required by law.

The court also addressed Steven Theriault, who had relapsed on probation after making earlier progress. Rather than revoke, the judge extended Theriault’s supervision and ordered entry and successful completion of a SAFETY (relapse treatment) program and related aftercare; the judge explained the probation extension and treatment conditions and warned that future violations could expose him to the underlying capped prison term.

Why it matters: The rulings resolve multiple longstanding probation and sentencing matters on the court’s calendar — including revocations that convert community supervision to prison terms and targeted treatment conditions intended to address substance use and public safety concerns.

What’s next: Sentenced defendants will be remanded or receive credit for time served where applicable; defendants placed on extended probation must complete ordered treatment and supervision conditions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Judge Raquel West's Personal Meeting Room","oneSentenceSummary","The court handed down several sentences and probation rulings: Anthony Mendoza had probation revoked and was sentenced to six years; Dante Caddy received a four-year term under a capped agreement; Christopher Ray and others received multi-year sentences or probation conditions.","taxTitle","252nd District Court, District Court Judges, Judicial, Texas","taxId",66306,"location","Texas","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6124644,"Several defendants reject plea offers; court moves cases to trial docket",937,7197000,8134000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328&start=7197&end=8134","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328/thumbnail_7197000.jpg","/articles/6124644/Texas/Several-defendants-reject-plea-offers-court-moves-cases-to-trial-docket","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6124644-c5a84c59ba73cce0e3ff920a5b23c1f5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770920540&Signature=Mp1vMmBc7wryOfDTayj79VxB~xcGlmOhbltpAchacwg0Vf9KzVDUCPV77tCf4D9FOzJ~lm5b8P56ptga9koU7f3LKr2mLEmDLSrKoMcaDLFH-64brTMxTdm6jHVo4JQEhlg1H6Xc1SuA4DcAdk2UlQMk5fbycuSGLW0R-iSt1BcopnMpLk2gO2cNq09F-rLyipM2tFo9tBsqS08KfNmQ9MH9r29fyE1xU6q4w9ab2kZ1WfI7X5x~wPh-dtic1LI-tvFts3kSEK5AWdrtnTtwECVu32O0SAwRBp0i-Ap8JYhVa2ymquWAfHoKJ83LsxzTz-HpJbdVtbYhd7q3o04mMw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Multiple defendants in the 252nd District Court rejected plea offers during a crowded criminal docket and had their matters set for the trial calendar.

Among the defendants who formally rejected offers were Lenny Laday, who declined a 20-year offer and asked for trial, and LeCaven Jenkins, who rejected concurrent offers (10 years and 5 years) and had both cases set for trial. Chase Breaux signed a plea-bargain rejection after the district attorney’s office offered 21 months in state jail. Earlier in the morning, Romeo Johnson and Lawrence Marks both declined plea proposals and had their cases scheduled for trial.

The Presiding Judge repeatedly warned the assembled defendants that she would not accept the previously discussed plea agreements after today unless counsel produced new evidence that materially altered the offers. As the judge put it in one hearing, the plea offer would be “off the table” after today unless attorneys obtained new information that could change the prosecutor’s recommendation.

Why it matters: Formal plea rejections shift these matters from negotiated disposition toward contested trials, increasing scheduling demands on the court and preparation burdens for prosecutors, defense counsel and witnesses.

What’s next: Each defendant was set for placement on the trial docket; defense and prosecution counsel were instructed to exchange discovery and prepare for trial dates.","At the docket call multiple defendants recorded formal rejections of plea offers and had their cases placed on the trial docket; the presiding judge warned she would not accept previously offered plea terms after today unless new, material evidence appeared.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},6124649,"Judge denies motion to quash in manslaughter case; case set for trial",174,2723000,2897000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328&start=2723&end=2897","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2680982-4bf9b8af84c2b93907fd5d151b74c328/thumbnail_2723000.jpg","/articles/6124649/Texas/Judge-denies-motion-to-quash-in-manslaughter-case-case-set-for-trial","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6124649-68b68ee3124f90e5a7d30e828a79782e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770920540&Signature=lsoduO-YdXufWapK-XRa99tp-c5CGFa6VHz1SA-TLQ41zSxXO5OI9FUdENRES69xZy501jsoZqH4rzlnB2H3TrUvPq8QSzXqlsTogK8PytuNh~AxOo-sL~W6wfZN-ojnZKlHtKmzVdCNUNPLw-6faTw6Urw6Gzco5ytL1NO5IbIKx7cSmyI8Au4zyVJEYlS1Wvl-Azq-AJKLoomj5nxYdi-irYKIUxWpLTxSnaJ0mMLMXRBfnKXjCoqn4Ns5jPVOLzCs~6h2VI9dUecKrZmith3NcMEuect6hIQr0taoI0Ve~hEs46Yp7qy5D0sIZ6c0vHhXE8MLaGF9BcIrBcBZpw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Presiding Judge denied a motion to quash the indictment in the manslaughter case against Harry Francis Lowenthal and ordered the matter moved to the trial docket.

The question before the court was whether language drawn from a fentanyl-related provision of the Texas Health and Safety Code improperly altered the mens rea required for manslaughter. Mister Reynolds, defense counsel, argued the indictment was “some sort of a hybrid” that invited the court to apply the Health and Safety Code provision in a way that lowered the state’s burden. Reynolds said the statute the state cited “only applies to a possession case” and that its language, as used in the indictment, would “lower their burden.”

Assistant District Attorney Mister Coleman responded that the indictment as drafted provided sufficient notice and that case law supports alleging acts that are “inherently reckless” without enumerating every evidentiary detail. Coleman noted the later-enacted felony provision referenced by the defense did not alter the indictment’s sufficiency for manslaughter. Mister Coleman argued the state’s indictment allowed proper preparation by the defense and cited precedent that the act itself can suffice to allege recklessness.

After hearing argument, the Presiding Judge said, “I’m going to, deny the motion to quash the indictment at this time,” and added that the court would set the case for trial. The judge also reminded the defendant that an earlier plea offer remained available only if new evidence surfaced; otherwise the court would not accept the prior plea. The court recorded that Lowenthal and defense counsel had rejected a previously offered plea and directed prosecutors and defense to prepare for trial.

Why it matters: The motion raised a legal dispute about how a statute addressing fentanyl-related deaths may interact with manslaughter allegations. The judge’s denial preserves the indictment as charged and moves the factual dispute about proof and statutory application to the trial stage.

What’s next: The case will be placed on the trial docket; counsel and the parties were instructed to exchange discovery and prepare for trial dates.","The court denied a defense motion to quash an indictment in the manslaughter case against Harry Francis Lowenthal after competing arguments about a fentanyl-related statute; the judge ordered the case placed on the trial docket and confirmed previously rejected plea offers remain off the table absent new evidence.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judge issues sentences and probation decisions in multiple cases, including 6-year term for revoked probation

Several defendants reject plea offers; court moves cases to trial docket

Judge denies motion to quash in manslaughter case; case set for trial