Opinion
No. 05-09-01194-CR
Opinion issued June 9, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.
On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F09-53489-LM.
Before Justices BRIDGES, FITZGERALD, and FILLMORE.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Yarndell Lamar McGee waived a jury and pleaded guilty to prostitution with three prior convictions for prostitution. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.02(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2009). The trial court assessed punishment at twenty-two months in a state jail facility and a $1000 fine. In a single point of error, appellant contends the trial court erred in failing to order a presentence investigation report (PSI). We affirm. The background of the case and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties, and therefore we limit recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.4 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled. Appellant contends that because he believed he was eligible for probation, the trial court was required to order a PSI before sentencing him. Because all parties knew about his severe mental problems, appellant contends the trial court had an increased responsibility to order a PSI. The State responds that appellant has failed to preserve his complaint for appellate review because he did not request a PSI or object to the trial court's failure to order a PSI. In general, a trial court must order a PSI in a felony case when a defendant requests one, even when a defendant is not eligible for community supervision. See Whitelaw v. State, 29 S.W.3d 129, 134 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 9 (Vernon Supp. 2009). An error in failing to order a PSI report is waived if a defendant fails to object or bring the omission to the trial court's attention. See Wright v. State, 873 S.W.2d 77, 83 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1994, pet. ref'd). In this case, appellant did not object to the trial court's failure to order a PSI or bring it to the trial court's attention either at the plea hearing or in a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a). Further, this record does not indicate a PSI was requested. Thus, appellant has waived his complaint. We overrule appellant's sole point of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.