juvenile proceeding and therefore implicitly overrides section 54.04(d) of the Family Code. Article 42.12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applies to adult criminal proceedings and prohibits a trial court from suspending a sentence and placing a defendant on community supervision when a defendant is found guilty of certain offenses, including murder. But nothing in either the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Family Code reflects any legislative intent to import into juvenile proceedings section 3g’s limitations on a trial court’s ability to grant community supervision in adult, criminal proceedings. The trial court erred when it advised D.I.B. that it did not have jurisdiction to grant probation. At several junctures during the adjudication proceedi .Civ.App.—Beaumont 1980, no writ) (<HOLDING>); D.J.M. v. State, 598 S.W.2d 726, 727
holding that failure to explain allegations and possible consequences mandated reversal holding that failure to explain allegations and possible consequences was fundamental error that required reversal even though the juvenile had not raised this in his brief holding that fundamental error occurred and reversal was required when trial court failed to explain allegations or to explain adequately future use of adjudication record holding that failure to give explanation of allegations required reversal holding that several coercive statements made in combination required reversal