Opinion
Nos. 05-09-01121-CR, 05-09-01122-CR
Opinion Filed July 29, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F08-71344-T and F08-71517-T.
Before Justices MOSELEY, BRIDGES, and FILLMORE.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Torry Laymon Robinson was charged with two felony offenses of aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of fourteen. Robinson pleaded nolo contendere and waived his right to a jury trial. The trial court found Robinson guilty on both charges. At the punishment phase, Robinson pleaded not true to the enhancement paragraphs for each charge. The trial court found the enhancement paragraphs true and sentenced Robinson to twenty years' imprisonment. Robinson appeals on a single issue, arguing that the trial court erred by admitting a penitentiary packet ("pen packet") into evidence during the punishment phase of the trial because it was not properly authenticated. The background of the case and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties; thus, we do not recite them here in detail. Because all dispositive issues are settled in law, we issue this memorandum opinion. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(a), 47.4. We affirm the trial court's judgments. We apply an abuse of discretion standard of review to the trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence. See Salazar v. State, 38 S.W.3d 141, 151 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); see also Elliot v. State, 858 S.W.2d 478, 488 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). We will reverse only if the trial court's decision was "outside the zone of reasonable disagreement." Salazar, 38 S.W.3d at 151; Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372, 391 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (op. on reh'g). For the documentation of a prior conviction to be admissible, the State must authenticate it. See Tex. R. Evid. 901(a); Banks v. State, 158 S.W.3d 649, 652 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, pet. ref'd). Public records are self-authenticating when they are certified as correct by a Texas official and contain the State seal. See Banks, 158 S.W.3d at 653; see also, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.09 § 8(b) (Vernon Supp. 2009). Joni White, as the Chairman of Classification and Records for TDCJ-CID, certified the pen packet, based on her personal acquaintance, to be a true and correct copy under seal of the department. The pen packet contains a side and front picture of Robinson, the judgment and indictment from the previous case, and Robinson's fingerprints. White's affidavit identified Robinson, his prisoner number, and the cause number of the previous case (which are also present on the documents comprising the pen packet) and stated that the documents attached to the affidavit were certified. Robinson objected to the pen packet because White's affidavit said she was "personally acquainted with the facts" instead of "ha[d] personal knowledge of the facts" and the affidavit does not state the number of pages certified. White stated in her affidavit she was personally acquainted with the facts of the pen packet. Personal knowledge and personal acquaintance both involve having personal, firsthand understanding of the facts. Similarly, the form of an affidavit for self-authenticated business records specifically uses the language "personally acquainted with the facts herein stated." Tex. R. Evid. 902.10(b). "There is a presumption of regularity in governmental affairs because public officers have a disincentive to falsify documents in the course of their duties." Hawkins v. State, 89 S.W.3d 674, 678-89 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. ref'd) (analyzing Reed v. State, 811 S.W.2d 582, 587 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)). White certified the documents attached to her affidavit, which comprised the entire pen packet. There is no evidence from the record that the pen packet was altered, separated, put back together, or missing documents. For these reasons, the pen packet is self-authenticated. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the pen packet into evidence. We overrule Robinson's sole issue and affirm the trial court's judgment.