Opinion
No. 05-02-01016-CR.
Opinion Issued March 31, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH, Tex.R.App.P. 47.
Appeal from the 282nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F01-52365-S. Affirmed.
Before Justices MORRIS, WHITTINGTON, and FRANCIS.
OPINION
Larry Delmareck Smith appeals his conviction for possession with intent to deliver cocaine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams. See Tex. Health Safety Code Ann. § 481.112(a), (d) (Vernon Supp. 2003). Appellant waived a jury trial, entered a non-negotiated guilty plea before the court, and pleaded true to one enhancement paragraph. The trial court judge found the enhancement paragraph true and sentenced appellant to fifteen years' confinement. In two points of error, appellant contends his guilty plea was involuntary because the evidence was legally and factually insufficient. We affirm the trial court's judgment. Although appellant characterizes his complaints as issues of voluntariness, he is actually challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. When a defendant pleads guilty, the State must introduce sufficient evidence into the record to support the plea and show the defendant is guilty, and said evidence shall be accepted by the court as the basis for its judgment. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon Supp. 2003); see also Ex parte Martin, 747 S.W.2d 789, 792-93 (Tex.Crim.App. 1988). The evidence may be stipulated if the defendant, in writing, waives the appearance, confrontation, and cross-examination of witnesses and consents to the introduction of documentary evidence in support of the judgment. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15. When a defendant voluntarily enters a plea of guilty, we do not apply the Jackson "rationality" test in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence. See Ex parte Martin, 747 S.W.2d at 791. Rather, we affirm the trial court's judgment if the evidence introduced embraces every essential element of the offense charged and is sufficient to establish a defendant's guilt. See Stone v. State, 919 S.W.2d 424, 427 (Tex.Crim. App. 1996). The record contains appellant's signed judicial confession that tracks the indictment. At the plea hearing, the State offered the judicial confession into evidence without objection by appellant. A judicial confession admitted into evidence and contained in the transcript is sufficient to prove appellant's guilt. See Pitts v. State, 916 S.W.2d 507, 510 (Tex.Crim. App. 1996); Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343, 353 (Tex.Crim. App. 1980) (op. on reh'g). At the plea hearing held on March 20, 2002, appellant testified he understood the charges in the indictment and the punishment range in light of one enhancement paragraph, and that the trial court would assess punishment within the punishment range. Appellant further testified he was freely and voluntarily pleading guilty because he was guilty and for no other reason. He also testified he knew the drugs were in the car and he was reaching for them. Thus, although appellant denied ownership of the drugs, he did not deny his exercise of care, custody, or control of them. Resolution of conflicts was for the fact finder. We conclude the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court complied with the article 1.15 provisions. We overrule appellant's two points of error. We affirm the trial court's judgment.