Jack Clifford Rice v. State Texas

Rice appeals the revocation of his probated sentence complaining in his one point of error that the trial court abused its
discretion because the State failed to prove he was the same person whose sentence was probated. Rice entered a plea of "not
true," to the revocation allegations but never complained in the trial court that he was the wrong man. Faced with adverse
authority requiring him to raise the identity issue in the trial court, he tries to distinguish the facts of his case from
those of the leading case. See Barrow v. State, 505 S.W.2d 808, 810 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974). We reject his argument, overrule
his point of error, and affirm the order revoking his probation. In Barrow, the court noted that even though no witness testified that the person whose probation was revoked was the same
person who was convicted and granted probation, Barrow's probation was revoked by the same judge who had granted it and the
attorney representing him at the revocation hearing had the same name as his attorney at the earlier hearing. Rice's case
involves different trial judges, different prosecutors, and different defense counsel; therefore, Rice reasons there is missing
a necessary link between the Jack Clifford Rice, Jr., who stood before the trial court, answered yes to the question "Are
you Jack Clifford Rice, Jr.?," and pled not true to the allegations of the petition to revoke probation and the Jack Clifford
Rice, Jr. who earlier was found guilty and assessed the probated sentence.