From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodie v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Feb 24, 1988
745 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 847-87.

February 24, 1988.

Appeal from 184th Judicial District Court, Harris County; Bob Burdette, Judge.

Michael B. Charlton, Charles F. Baird, on appeal only, Houston, for appellant.

John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty. and J. Harvey Hudson, and Jim Buchanan, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.

OPINION ON REFUSAL OF APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


Discretionary review from Fourteenth Court of Appeals, 14th Supreme Judicial District.


Appellant pled guilty to a charge of burglary of a habitation. The trial court deferred adjudication for five years, and assessed a $500.00 fine. After appellant violated the conditions of the deferral, the trial court adjudicated guilt and sentenced appellant to 30 years imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections. Appellant's conviction was affirmed by the Houston Court of Appeals in a published opinion dated June 11, 1987. Goodie v. State, 735 S.W.2d 871 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th] 1987), opinion on rehearing 737 S.W.2d 37. Appellant petitioned this Court for discretionary review to determine whether the trial court erred in permitting the prosecutor to admonish appellant regarding his plea, with consent of appellant's attorney.

We agree with the Court of Appeals that the case does not merit reversal and will refuse the petition. As with every case where discretionary review is refused, however, this refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App. 1983). Our refusal to grant the petition for discretionary review should not be construed as approval of a practice of having someone other than the trial judge deliver the admonishments to a defendant. Article 26.13(a), V.A.C.C.P., states in pertinent part: "Prior to accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court shall admonish the defendant . . ." Id. See also Whitten v. State, 587 S.W.2d 156 (Tex.Cr.App. 1979).

With this disclaimer, we refuse appellant's petition for discretionary review.

TEAGUE, J., would grant.


Summaries of

Goodie v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Feb 24, 1988
745 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988)
Case details for

Goodie v. State

Case Details

Full title:Curtis Ray GOODIE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Feb 24, 1988

Citations

745 S.W.2d 379 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988)

Citing Cases

Nguyen v. State

Here, the State contends the fact the words were not spoken by the trial judge does not preclude a finding…

Graves v. State

The appellant maintains that the rule set forth in Burks v. State, 165 S.W.2d 460 (Tex.Crim.App. 1942),…