Judge Stephanie Boyd presided over a packed criminal docket in the 187th District Court on Nov. 19, 2025, during which multiple defendants entered pleas or had sentencing terms set.

Several plea agreements were accepted and sentencing conditions imposed. In State v. Valerie Campion (multiple consolidated cause numbers), the court found Campion guilty under a plea agreement and sentenced her to 10 years in prison, suspended and probated for 10 years to run concurrent with related cases. Court-ordered conditions include regular reporting (by Zoom or in person), random urinalysis, proof of employment within 45 days, prohibition on employment as a home‑health care provider or working with minors, no unsupervised contact with minors, 200 hours of community service (waived on completion of parenting classes), court‑ordered parenting classes, trauma assessment and monthly field visits; GPS tracking was ordered with waived fees. The prosecutor and defense confirmed the parties had amended the plea bargain and reviewed the presentence investigation (PSI).

In State v. Caitlin Jeffrey, the court accepted a plea assessing two years in a state‑jail facility to be suspended and probated for four years, with an $800 fine to be probated. Recognizing mental‑health concerns raised in the PSI and by counsel, Judge Boyd ordered expedited MICK and TAP evaluations in custody and scheduled a return on Dec. 2 to confirm completion and follow recommendations. As with the other pleas, conditions include reporting, random UAs and limits on employment around minors.

At a revocation hearing for Julian Rodriguez, the defendant pleaded true to alleged supervision violations. The court revoked community supervision, adjudicated guilt and sentenced Rodriguez to five years in prison in an agreed disposition; the defendant waived appeal rights.

In State v. Gary Dean Aragon, the court took a plea to possession of a controlled substance (state jail felony) with a recommended two‑year state‑jail term and an $800 fine; the state recommended community supervision with specified treatment and no‑contact conditions. In State v. Daniel Hoyle Escalante, the court deferred finding of guilt on a criminal mischief charge and set restitution follow‑up; the bench set a restitution/sentencing follow‑up for Dec. 4 after counsel notified the court the complainant’s insurance documentation and proposed restitution would be provided.

Across cases, the court repeatedly admonished defendants that by entering plea bargains they waived most appeal rights and reminded defendants convicted of felonies that possession of weapons and ammunition is prohibited. Several defendants were ordered into treatment programs or evaluations and given conditions intended to prioritize supervision and treatment over immediate incarceration where the negotiated plea allowed.

The docket combined routine procedural confirmations (discovery compliance, waiver of jury, review of admonishments) with targeted orders to expedite mental‑health evaluations, direct treatment through the Center for Healthcare Services, and schedule follow‑ups to ensure evaluations and restitution documentation are completed.