Opinion
No. 05-08-00697-CR
Opinion Filed March 30, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47
On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F08-12946-UV.
Before Justices RICHTER, LANG, and MURPHY.
OPINION
Mark Andrew Cowart waived a jury and pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a fraudulent identification. The trial court assessed punishment, enhanced by prior felony convictions, at four years' imprisonment. In two issues, appellant contends his guilty plea was involuntary. We affirm the trial court's judgment. In his first issue, appellant contends his guilty plea was involuntary because he believed he would receive community supervision. In his second issue, appellant contends the trial court's failure to conduct an "on-the-record colloquy" regarding the consequences of his guilty plea violated due process and rendered his plea involuntary. The State responds that the record shows appellant entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily. Because both of appellant's complaints address the voluntariness of his guilty plea, we will address them together. When considering the voluntariness of a guilty plea, we must examine the entire record. See Martinez v. State, 981 S.W.2d 195, 197 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998) (per curiam). If the trial court properly admonished a defendant before a guilty plea was entered, there is a prima facie showing the plea was both knowing and voluntary. See id. In this case, the record shows the trial court properly admonished appellant both orally and in writing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13(a), (c) (Vernon 2009); Kirk v. State, 949 S.W.2d 769, 771 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, pet. ref'd). During the plea hearing, appellant testified he understood the charges in the indictment, the punishment range for the offense, and the enhanced punishment range in light of two prior felony convictions. Appellant testified he understood the trial judge could assess punishment anywhere within the punishment range, including probation to twenty years' imprisonment. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.33(a) (Vernon 2003). Appellant's signed judicial confession and stipulation of evidence was admitted into evidence. Appellant testified he knew his "lengthy criminal history is a mess," but hoped the trial judge would place him on community supervision so he could take care of his mother, who was in her "final days" with emphysema. Appellant testified that although he had been to prison on four separate occasions, he wanted a chance to be successful on community supervision. Nothing in the record shows appellant believed he would receive community supervision. The fact that appellant received greater punishment than he hoped for does not render his plea involuntary. See Tovar-Torres v. State, 860 S.W.2d 176, 178 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1993, no pet.). Moreover, the trial court conducted an adequate inquiry into the voluntariness of appellant's guilty plea. We conclude appellant entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily. We resolve appellant's first and second issues against him. We affirm the trial court's judgment.