Opinion
No. 07-09-0064-CR
January 12, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appealed from the 64th District Court of Hale County; No. A17752-0808; Hon. Robert W. Kinkaid, Jr., Presiding.
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion
Gustavo Mendoza Gallardo (appellant) appeals his felony conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI). His sole issue involves the sufficiency of the evidence establishing guilt. That is, he contends that the State failed to prove one of the prior DWI convictions it alleged for purposes of enhancement. It so failed to prove the conviction, according to appellant, because the copy of the judgment manifesting the conviction was unsigned. This argument was expressly considered and rejected in Mulder v. State, 707 S.W.2d 908 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986). There, the court held that the validity of a conviction was not affected by the failure of the trial judge to sign the judgment. Id. Thus, the unsigned judgment was sufficient evidence to prove the existence of a prior conviction. Id.; accord, Flores v. State, 139 S.W.3d 61, 65 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2004, pet. ref'd) (considering and rejecting the same argument). Accordingly, we overrule the issue and affirm the judgment of the trial court.