Opinion
No. 05-07-00727-CR
Opinion Filed May 19, 2008. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47
On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F06-66118-LT.
Before Justices MORRIS, FITZGERALD, and LANG.
OPINION ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
This Court's opinion of April 15, 2008 is withdrawn, and the following is the opinion of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 50. Keith Leonard Hill waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, a firearm. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 29.02, .03 (Vernon 2003). The plea was pursuant to an agreement by which punishment would be capped at fifteen years' imprisonment with an optional fine up to $10,000. The trial court sentenced appellant to fourteen years' imprisonment and a $2500 fine. The trial court subsequently gave appellant permission to appeal. Appellant brings two points of error contending the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to prove the deadly weapon allegations. We affirm appellant's conviction. Appellant asserts that the standards of review set forth in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979) (legal sufficiency), and Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404, 414-15 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (factual sufficiency), apply in this case. The appellate standards of review for legal and factual sufficiency do not apply to felony cases where the defendant enters a plea of guilty or nolo contendere. Ex parte Martin, 747 S.W.2d 789, 791 (Tex.Crim.App. 1988); Ex parte Williams, 703 S.W.2d 674, 682 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986); O'Brien v. State, 154 S.W.3d 908, 910 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005, no pet.); see also McGill v. State, 200 S.W.3d 325, 329-31 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, no pet.). These standards apply only where the federal constitution places the burden on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See Williams, 703 S.W.2d at 682; O'Brien, 154 S.W.3d at 910. When the defendant waives his right to a jury trial and pleads guilty or nolo contendere, the State must introduce sufficient evidence to support the plea and establish the defendant's guilt. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon 2005). There is no requirement that the supporting evidence prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Ex parte Martin, 747 S.W.2d at 792-93. Under article 1.15, the evidence is sufficient to support a plea of nolo contendere if it embraces every essential element of the offense charged. Stone v. State, 919 S.W.2d 424, 427 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). A judicial confession, standing alone, is sufficient to sustain a conviction upon a guilty plea and to satisfy the requirements of article 1.15. Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343, 353 (Tex.Crim.App. 1979); McGill, 200 S.W.3d at 330 n. 1. The clerk's record contains appellant's signed judicial confession. A judicial confession admitted into evidence and contained in the clerk's record is sufficient to prove appellant's guilt. See Pitts v. State, 916 S.W.2d 507, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). Appellant admits in his confession that he used and exhibited a deadly weapon, to wit: a firearm. Accordingly, the evidence is sufficient to support appellant's conviction. We overrule appellant's first and second points of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.