A Texas appellate court recently upheld the revocation of probation for Heath Wayne Fisher, who faced charges of theft and burglary. The Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District, issued its ruling on July 2, 2026, in case number 11-25-00060-CR. This decision affects Fisher, who will now serve his original sentences following the court's ruling.
Fisher had initially pled guilty to two offenses: theft from a person, classified as a state-jail felony, and burglary of a habitation, which is a second-degree felony. As part of a plea agreement with the State of Texas, he received a two-year sentence for the theft charge, which was suspended in favor of five years of community supervision. For the burglary charge, he received a ten-year sentence, also suspended, with eight years of community supervision.
However, the State later moved to revoke Fisher's community supervision, alleging that he had committed an assault, violating the terms of his probation. During a hearing on March 10, 2025, Fisher denied the allegation but the trial court found the State's claim to be true, leading to the revocation of his community supervision and reinstatement of his original sentences.
The court ruled, “the evidence presented at the hearing, although contested, is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding of ‘true’ in each cause.” The judges on the panel included Chief Justice Bailey, Justice W. Stacy Trotter, and Justice Williams. They reviewed the case under an abuse of discretion standard and found that the trial court had sufficient evidence to support its decision.
In its opinion, the court noted that in a revocation proceeding, the State only needs to prove a violation of community supervision terms by a preponderance of the evidence. This means that the evidence must show that it is more likely than not that a violation occurred. The court stated, “proof of only a single violation of the terms and conditions of a probationer’s community supervision is sufficient to support the trial court’s revocation order.”
While the court affirmed the trial court's decision, it also identified a clerical error in the trial court's judgment. Fisher had pled “not true” to the allegation of assault, but the judgment incorrectly stated that he pled “true.” The appellate court corrected this error, modifying the judgment to reflect Fisher's actual plea.
This ruling has significant implications for Fisher and others in similar situations. It reinforces the idea that courts can revoke probation based on a single violation of community supervision terms. Additionally, the case highlights the importance of accurate record-keeping in legal proceedings, as clerical errors can lead to confusion and require correction by higher courts.
The decision may serve as a precedent for future cases involving community supervision violations in Texas. It emphasizes that the burden of proof is relatively low for the State in these matters, which could impact how probation violations are handled in the future.
Looking ahead, Fisher has the option to file a petition for discretionary review, which could allow for further examination of his case by the Texas Supreme Court. However, details regarding any related cases or additional appeals were not available in the court filing.