From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bullock v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Dec 3, 2015
No. 05-14-00560-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 3, 2015)

Opinion

No. 05-14-00560-CR

12-03-2015

PATRICK LEE BULLOCK, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 199-81610-2013

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Fillmore and Stoddart
Opinion by Chief Justice Wright

Patrick Lee Bullock appeals following his convictions on four counts of sexual assault of a child. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court erred in signing judgments of conviction for three counts of indecency with a child and one count of sexual performance by a child.

In an eight-count indictment, appellant was charged with four counts of sexual assault of a child (Counts I, II, III, and IV), three counts of indecency with a child (Counts V, VI, VII), and one count of sexual performance by a child (Count VIII). See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 21.11(a), 22.011(a)(2), 43.25(b) (West 2011). At the plea hearing, the State abandoned Counts V, VI, VII, and VIII in exchange for appellant's guilty pleas to Counts I through IV, and entered into no agreement with appellant as to punishment. Appellant waived a jury and pleaded guilty to Counts I through IV, and went "open" to the trial court for punishment. During the punishment hearing, the trial court heard testimony from several witnesses, including appellant. The trial court found appellant guilty of the four counts of sexual assault of a child and assessed punishment at fifteen years' imprisonment.

Appellant does not complain about the trial court's sexual assault convictions. In his sole issue, appellant asserts the trial court erred in signing judgments of conviction for Counts V, VI, VII, and VIII because the State abandoned those charges as part of an open plea agreement. The State did not file a brief in the appeal.

The record of the guilty plea hearing clearly shows the trial court accepted the State's abandonment of Counts V through VIII as a condition of appellant's guilty plea to Counts I through IV and the agreement to allow the court to assess punishment. No plea was entered on Counts V through VIII, no evidence was presented, and no findings of guilt were made. Thus, the trial court erred in entering judgments of conviction on Counts V through VIII. We sustain appellant's issue.

We vacate the trial court's judgments of conviction on Counts V through VIII. We affirm the trial court's judgment on Counts I through IV. Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
140560F.U05

/Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE

JUDGMENT

Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 199-81610-2013).
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, Justices Fillmore and Stoddart participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, we VACATE the trial court's judgments for Counts V through VIII.

We AFFIRM the trial court's judgment for Counts I through IV.


Summaries of

Bullock v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Dec 3, 2015
No. 05-14-00560-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 3, 2015)
Case details for

Bullock v. State

Case Details

Full title:PATRICK LEE BULLOCK, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Dec 3, 2015

Citations

No. 05-14-00560-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 3, 2015)

Citing Cases

Rivera v. State

We conclude that the trial court's oral pronouncement of judgment erroneously encompassed Count II. See…