v.
State
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-13-00665-CR
———————————
ARMANDO SOSA, JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 262nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1369717
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Armando Sosa, Jr., was charged by indictment with aggravated robbery. [1] Appellant pleaded guilty. The trial court found him guilty and assessed defendant, his attorney, and the attorney representing the State, and then filed with the papers of the case. The defendant then came before me and I approved the above and the defendant entered a plea of guilty.” This document is included in the appellate record as a part of the clerk’s record.
Sufficiency of Evidence in Support of Guilty Plea
In his sole issue, Appellant argues the State failed to offer sufficient evidence to support his plea of guilty.
A. Standard of Review
When he pleads guilty, a criminal defendant waives his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. Keller v. State, 125 S.W.3d 600, 605 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2003), pet. dism’d, improvidently granted, 146 S.W.3d 677 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (per curiam); see also Staggs v. State, 314 S.W.3d 155, 159 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, no pet.). In such cases, we confine our review of the sufficiency of the evidence to determining whether the evidence supports the conviction under article 1.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.15 (West 2005) (stating that State must “introduce evidence into the record showing the guilt of the defendant and said evidence shall be accepted by the court as the basis for its judgment and in no event shall a person charged be convicted upon his plea without sufficient evidence to support the same.”); Keller, 125 S.W.3d at 605 (citing TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.15 (West 2005)). The State must offer sufficient proof to support any judgment based on a guilty plea in a felony case tried before a court. Keller, 125 S.W.3d at 604 (citation omitted); see also Ex parte Williams, 703 S.W.2d 674, 678 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986). “The State, however, is not required to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; the supporting evidence must simply embrace every essential element of the charged offense.” Staggs, 314 S.W.3d at 159.
B. Analysis
Article 1.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the State to “introduce evidence into the record showing the guilt of the defendant and said evidence shall be accepted by the court as the basis for its judgment and in no event shall a person charged be convicted upon his plea without sufficient evidence to support the same.” TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.15; see Menefee v. State, 287 S.W.3d 9, 13–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). The evidence supporting a guilty plea may take several forms. Menefee, 287 S.W.3d at 13. Article 1.15 provides that the evidence may be stipulated if the defendant in such a case consents in writing, in open court, to waive the appearance, confrontation, and cross-examination of witnesses, and further consents either to an oral stipulation of the evidence and testimony or to the introduction of testimony by affidavits, written statements of witnesses, and any other documentary evidence in support of the judgment of the court.
TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.15.
The State argues that the facts of this case are identical to the facts of Rexford v. State, 818 S.W.2d 494 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991), pet ref’d 823 S.W.2d 296 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We agree. In Rexford, the defendant had pleaded guilty to a charge of sexual assault. Id. at 495. On appeal, the defendant argued the evidence was insufficient to support his plea of guilty. Id. As here, the defendant had signed and notarized a judicial confession. The confession identified the elements of the crime for which he had been charged. Id. “The document further stated that [the defendant] confessed that the allegations were true.” Id. In addition to defendant’s signature, the confession contained the signature of the defendant’s attorney, the prosecutor, and the trial court. Id. As here, the confession was never formally admitted into evidence, but the document stated that it was executed by the defendant, filed with the papers of the case, and approved by the trial court. Id. Based on these facts, we held the confession was accepted and considered by the court and, accordingly, constituted sufficient support to his plea of guilty. Id.
All relevant facts present in Rexford are present in this case. Because there is no legally-significant distinction between Rexford and this case, the holding of Rexford applies. Accordingly, we hold there is sufficient supporting evidence to uphold Appellant’s plea of guilty. We overrule Appellant’s sole issue.
Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.