Opinion
No. 14-03-00514-CR
Memorandum Opinion filed May 27, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 339th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 911,354. Affirmed.
Panel consists of Chief Justice HEDGES and Justices FROST and GUZMAN.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant entered a plea of guilty without an agreed recommendation to the offense of aggravated robbery. He was convicted and the trial court assessed punishment at confinement for twenty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. In a single issue, appellant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial without conducting a hearing. We affirm. After his guilty plea, appellant filed a motion asking the trial court to grant a new trial because appellant had obtained newly discovered evidence. No affidavit accompanied the motion. We review a trial court's denial of a hearing on a motion for new trial for an abuse of discretion. State v. Gonzalez, 855 S.W.2d 692, 696 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993). Under that standard, we reverse "only when the trial judge's decision was so clearly wrong as to lie outside that zone within which reasonable persons might disagree." Id. at 695 n. 4. We may not substitute our judgment for that of the trial court, but rather must decide whether the trial court's decision was arbitrary or unreasonable. Id. The purpose of a hearing on a motion for new trial is for a defendant to develop the issues raised in the motion. Jordan v. State, 883 S.W.2d 664, 665 (Tex.Crim.App. 1994). A defendant does not have an absolute right to a hearing on a motion for new trial. Reyes v. State, 849 S.W.2d 812, 815 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993). As a prerequisite to a hearing, the motion for new trial must be supported by an affidavit specifically showing the truth of the grounds alleged as a basis for a new trial. Id. at 816. Because appellant's motion is not accompanied by an affidavit, he was not entitled to a new trial. See id. Appellant's sole issue is overruled. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Appellant filed a first amended motion for new trial on different grounds, which was accompanied by an affidavit. On appeal, appellant does not complain of the denial of a hearing on his first amended motion. We note, however, that appellant would not be entitled to a hearing on that motion because the affidavit supporting the motion is conclusory. See Buerger v. State, 60 S.W.3d 358, 362-63 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. ref'd).