Opinion
No. 05-04-01327-CR
Opinion issued February 13, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 199th District Court, Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 199-81183-03. Affirmed.
Before Justices MOSELEY, O'NEILL, and FITZGERALD.
OPINION
Jesse James Simmons appeals his driving while intoxicated (DWI) conviction, enhanced by two prior DWI convictions. The jury convicted appellant. After finding two additional enhancement allegations true, the trial court sentenced appellant to thirty-five years' confinement. In two issues, appellant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for instructed verdict because there was legally insufficient evidence to prove he had twice before been convicted of DWI, and the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the two prior DWI's were not proven. We affirm the trial court's judgment. In January 2003, appellant was arrested and charged with DWI. The indictment alleged two prior misdemeanor DWI convictions for purposes of elevating the new offense to a felony. The two prior convictions alleged were cause number MB94-20703-E, a September 8, 1994 conviction in the Dallas County Criminal Court, and cause number MB89-17432-E, a July 26, 1990 conviction in Dallas County Criminal Court No. 4. Appellant filed a pretrial objection to the introduction of evidence to prove he was twice before convicted of DWI. The trial court overruled appellant's objection. Appellant moved for a partial directed verdict on the offense of felony DWI, arguing the State had failed to prove the two prior DWI convictions. The trial court denied appellant's motion, admitted the evidence of the two prior DWI convictions, and charged the jury regarding the two prior convictions. The jury convicted appellant, the trial court sentenced him to thirty-five years' confinement, and this appeal followed. In his first issue, appellant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict because the evidence was legally insufficient to establish he had two prior DWI convictions. We treat a point of error complaining about a trial court's failure to grant a motion for directed verdict as a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence. Williams v. State, 937 S.W.2d 479, 482 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). Evidence is legally sufficient when, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational jury could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); Williams, 937 S.W.2d at 482. A DWI offense becomes a third degree felony if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the person has previously been convicted of two other offenses relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 49.09(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). A prior conviction that occurs on or before September 1, 1994, is considered final for purposes of enhancement whether or not the sentence for the conviction is imposed or probated. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 49.09(d) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). A conviction which occurred after January 1, 1984, but prior to September 1, 1994, may also properly be used to enhance a sentence. Ex parte Serrato, 3 S.W.3d 41, 43 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999). Here, the record contains a September 8, 1994 judgment convicting appellant of DWI and a July 26, 1990 waiver of jury trial and plea of guilty to DWI. The record contains appellant's driver's license records showing these same DWI convictions and an additional DWI conviction on April 7, 1999. We conclude this evidence was legally sufficient to establish that appellant had two prior DWI convictions. We overrule appellant's first point of error. Because we conclude the evidence was legally sufficient to show appellant's two prior DWI convictions, the district court did not lack jurisdiction over the underlying cause. We overrule appellant's second point of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.