Opinion
Nos. 05-04-00950-CR, 05-04-00951-CR, 05-04-00952-CR, 05-04-00953-CR
Opinion Filed February 28, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. F04-25784-JH, F04-25785-JH, F04-25787-UH, F04-40469-KH. Affirm.
Before Justices BRIDGES, O'NEILL, and MAZZANT.
OPINION
Jessica Lynn Brown waived a jury trial in each case and entered non-negotiated guilty pleas to the offenses of credit card abuse, unlawful possession and use of fraudulent identification, tampering with government records, and engaging in organized criminal activity. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 32.31, 32.51, 37.10, 71.02 (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). Appellant also pleaded true to two enhancement paragraphs contained in each indictment. The trial court found appellant guilty and the enhancement paragraphs true. The judge assessed punishment at twenty years' confinement for the credit card abuse, fraudulent identification, and tampering offenses, and twenty-five years' confinement for the organized crime offense. In a single issue, appellant contends her guilty pleas were involuntary. We affirm the trial court's judgments. Appellant argues her guilty pleas were involuntary because she believed she would receive deferred adjudication probation and drug treatment. Appellant asserts she did not understand the consequences of entering open guilty pleas, and she was only seeking treatment. The State responds the record shows appellant knowingly and voluntarily pleaded guilty to each indictment and was not misinformed about the consequences of her guilty pleas. We agree with the State. The record shows the trial court properly admonished appellant orally and in writing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13(a), (d) (Vernon 1989 Supp. 2004-05); Kirk v. State, 949 S.W.2d 769, 771 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, pet. ref'd). Appellant testified she understood the punishment ranges in light of the enhancement paragraphs, there were no plea bargain agreements in these cases, and she was freely and voluntarily pleading guilty to each indictment and true to the enhancement paragraphs. Appellant's signed judicial confessions and stipulations of evidence were offered into evidence without objection. Nothing in the record shows appellant was not aware of the consequences of her guilty pleas and that she was harmed or misled by the trial judge's admonishments. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13(c); Martinez v. State, 981 S.W.2d 195, 197 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998). Although appellant clearly hoped to receive community supervision, nothing in the record supports her argument that she pleaded guilty believing she would be placed on probation. The fact that appellant received greater punishment than she hoped for does not render her pleas involuntary. See Tovar-Torres v. State, 860 S.W.2d 176, 178 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1993, no pet.). We resolve appellant's sole issue against her. We affirm the trial court's judgment in each case.