Opinion
No. 05-08-01075-CR
Opinion issued July 28, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F07-56044-HK.
Before Justices MORRIS, RICHTER, and LANG-MIERS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this case, Gary Dale Walker waived a jury and pleaded guilty to burglary of a habitation. In a single point of error, appellant contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel. 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 47.1 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled. Appellant complains his trial counsel was ineffective in not filing a plea to the trial court's jurisdiction. Appellant's indictment was returned in the Criminal District Court No. 1, but his case was tried in the Criminal District Court No. 4, with no order transferring the case. Appellant argues that, but for counsel's deficient performance, there is a reasonable probability a plea to the jurisdiction would have been sustained and the case would have been continued until a proper transfer order was entered. To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant must show that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and there is a reasonable probability the results of the proceedings would have been different in the absence of counsel's errors. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984); Bone v. State, 77 S.W.3d 828, 833 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002). Appellant has the burden of proving ineffective assistance of counsel by a preponderance of the evidence. Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999). The record shows the grand jury was impaneled in the Criminal District Court No. 1 and, after the indictment was returned, the case was assigned to the Criminal District Court No. 4. Nothing in the record shows the case was originally filed in the Criminal District Court No. 1. This Court has previously held that no transfer order is required when one court empanels the grand jury that returns an indictment in the case but the case is actually filed in another court. See Bourque v. State, 156 S.W.3d 675, 678 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005, pet. ref'd). Because no transfer order was required, trial counsel could not be ineffective for failing to file a plea to the jurisdiction. See id. Appellant has not met his burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that counsel was ineffective. We overrule appellant's sole point of error.