Opinion
No. 05-05-00714-CR
Opinion issued April 25, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F04-53164-Mnj. Affirmed.
Before Justices WHITTINGTON, BRIDGES, and RICHTER.
OPINION
Elissia Deshawn Johnson pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 29.02, 29.03 (Vernon 2003). The trial judge sentenced appellant to thirteen years' imprisonment, assessed a $1000 fine, and made an affirmative deadly weapon finding. In a single point of error, appellant contends her guilty plea was involuntary. We affirm the trial court's judgment. Appellant argues the trial judge did not orally admonish her about the punishment range, her right to a jury, and the deportation consequences of her guilty plea. Appellant acknowledges the record contains the trial court's written admonishments and that she told the judge she understood those admonishments. The State responds that the trial court substantially complied with article 26.13. We agree. Article 26.13 provides that before accepting a defendant's guilty plea, the trial court must give several specific admonishments to the defendant. These admonishments may be given either orally or in writing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13(a), (d) (Vernon Supp. 2005). Substantial compliance is sufficient unless the defendant affirmatively shows that she was not aware of the consequences of her plea and that she was misled or harmed by the admonishment of the court. Id. art. 26.13(c). The record shows the trial court properly admonished appellant in writing. See id.; Kirk v. State, 949 S.W.2d 769, 771 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, pet. ref'd). The record contains the written admonishment form signed by appellant, her attorney, the prosecutor, and the judge. The form states appellant understood the consequences of a plea of guilty, her right to a jury, and the written admonishments. Thus, the trial court substantially complied with the article 26.13 requirements. At the plea hearing, appellant testified she understood the charges in the indictment, the punishment range for the offense, and that she was freely and voluntarily pleading guilty. Other than appellant's bare assertions, nothing in the record shows appellant was not aware of the consequences of her guilty plea and that she was harmed or misled by the admonishments given. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13(c). We overrule appellant's point of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.