A Texas appellate court has upheld the revocation of Ryan Lane Pueblo's community supervision related to a driving while intoxicated (DWI) conviction. The ruling affects individuals on community supervision in Texas, highlighting the importance of adhering to procedural requirements during hearings.
The Texas Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District delivered its opinion on July 9, 2026, in case number 13-26-00073-CR. The court affirmed the decision of the County Court at Law No. 2 of Johnson County, Texas, which had previously revoked Pueblo's community supervision. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the necessity for defendants to follow proper legal procedures when contesting violations of community supervision.
Background
Ryan Lane Pueblo was charged with DWI after an incident on November 25, 2024. This charge was enhanced due to a prior DWI conviction from September 27, 2018. After pleading guilty on April 17, 2025, Pueblo was sentenced to 365 days in jail, which was suspended, and he was placed on community supervision for two years.
On November 14, 2025, the State of Texas filed a motion to revoke Pueblo's community supervision, citing multiple violations of the terms set by the court. During the revocation hearing, Pueblo chose to represent himself after signing a waiver of his right to counsel. The hearing proceeded without any objections from Pueblo regarding the alleged lack of notice about the violations.
The Ruling
The court ruled that Pueblo's appeal was not preserved for review because he failed to raise any objections during the revocation hearing. The opinion stated, "Pueblo did not object on any grounds during his revocation hearing, nor did he file a motion for new trial arguing he failed to receive notice of his alleged community supervision violations." This lack of action meant that he could not claim a violation of his due process rights on appeal.
Justice Clarissa Silva authored the opinion, emphasizing that procedural due process requires timely objections to be made during hearings. The court noted that written notice of violations is a minimum requirement, but failing to object at the revocation hearing forfeits the right to appeal based on that claim.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for individuals on community supervision in Texas. It reinforces the necessity for defendants to actively participate in their hearings and raise any concerns regarding due process at the time of the hearing. The decision serves as a reminder that failing to follow procedural rules can result in the loss of the right to contest decisions made by the court.
Additionally, the ruling may influence future cases involving community supervision revocation. It highlights the importance of preserving errors for appeal and the consequences of inaction during legal proceedings. Defendants must be vigilant in ensuring their rights are protected throughout the judicial process.
What's Next
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Pueblo plans to appeal the ruling further. However, given the court's clear stance on the requirement for timely objections, it appears challenging for him to pursue further legal action based on the same grounds.