Opinion
Nos. 05-03-00591-CR, 05-03-00592-CR.
Opinion Filed October 28, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. F02-32377-MQT, F02-39802-ST. AFFIRMED
Before Justices MORRIS, O'NEILL, and LANG.
OPINION
Jason Berna Garms appeals his convictions for theft of property valued at $1500 or more but less than $20,000 (cause no. 05-03-00591-CR) and burglary of a building (cause no. 05-03-00592 — CR). See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 30.02, 31.03 (Vernon 2003). In each case, appellant waived a jury trial and entered non-negotiated guilty pleas before the court. The trial court sentenced appellant to one year in a state jail facility in each case. In two points of error, appellant contends the trial court failed to enter written orders approving the waiver of jury in each case. We affirm the trial court's judgments. The record contains a "Waiver of Jury" form that is signed by appellant, his attorney, and the prosecuting attorney, but not the judge. The record also contains a "Plea Agreement" form signed by appellant, his attorney, the prosecuting attorney, and a magistrate judge. Included in the plea agreement are statements that appellant understood he had an "absolute right to a jury trial," and that appellant "waived" the right to jury in each case. At a plea hearing held on February 23, 2003, appellant entered open guilty pleas before a magistrate judge. Appellant testified he understood the charges in each indictment, the punishment range, and his right to a jury trial. Appellant further testified he waived his right to a jury in each case, he was pleading guilty to the indictments, and he voluntarily signed a judicial confession in each case. The judicial confessions were offered into evidence without objection. The magistrate passed the case for further proceedings and a presentence investigation report. At the April 14, 2003 punishment hearing, the trial judge recounted that appellant had previously waived his right to a jury and entered guilty pleas. Appellant testified he was guilty of the offenses because he knowingly received stolen merchandise and resold it for his golf supply business. Appellant argues the trial court failed to comply with the requirements of articles 1.13 and 1.15 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure because it did not approve the waiver of jury form in each case, nor did the trial court enter a written order approving the waivers. The State responds the record shows the trial court consented to the jury waivers, and any error was harmless. We agree with the State. Article 1.15 provides that no felony conviction can be had absent a jury verdict "unless the defendant, upon entering a plea, has in open court in person waived his right of trial by jury in writing in accordance with Articles 1.13 and 1.14." See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon Supp. 2003). Article 1.13 requires jury waivers in non-capital cases to be "made in person by the defendant in writing in open court with the consent and approval of the court and the attorney representing the State." See id. art. 1.13(a). The record shows the jury waivers satisfy the requirements of articles 1.13 and 1.15. The trial court approved the plea agreement form in each case, which included appellant's waiver of jury trial. The magistrate's written findings state appellant's waiver of jury trial was approved in each case, and the trial court accepted the magistrate's findings. The judgments recite that appellant "waived trial by jury." Recitations in the judgment are binding in the absence of direct proof of their falsity. See Johnson v. State, 72 S.W.3d 346, 349 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002). Any error in the judge not signing one of the waiver forms was harmless. See Johnson, 72 S.W.3d at 349; see also Tex.R.App.P. 44.2(b). Accordingly, we overrule appellant's two points of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.