1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 07- 026- CR
DON AL D H AR OL D B R ADY AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M CO UN TY CRI M I NA LCO URT NO . 4OF TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppe l l antD ona l d Har ol d Br adyap pea l s f r om hi s con vi ct i on f ord ri v i ng
w hi l e i nt oxi cat ed. In t w o poi nt s, he ar gues t hathi s pl ea ofgui l t y w as i nvol unt ary be ca us e ( 1) t he t r i alco urtdi d notf ol l ow th e pl ea ag r ee m entan d
s e n t e n c e d h im t o t w o e x t r a d a y s in ja il a n d (2 ) n o o n e t o ld h im t h a th e w o u ld b e i n e l i g i b l e fo r a c o m m e rc i a l d ri v e r’s l i c e n s e i f h e p l e a d e d g u i l tyto D W I. W e a f f i r m.2 ... Th e Stat e di d not at t end t he hear i ng. A ppel l ant ’ s m ot i on f ornew t r i al

does not i ncl ude a cert i f i cat e ofservi ce, and nothi ng i n t he r ecor d suggest s t hat t he St at e h ad not i ceoft he hea r i ng. 2 Back gr ound A p p e l l a n t p l e a d e d g u i l t y to D W I o n N o v e m b e r 6 , 2 0 0 6 . T h e tri a l c o u rt f oun d hi m gui l t y, asses sed puni shm entatt w ent y days i n j ai l and a $6 00 f i ne, and suspend ed hi s dr i ver ’ s l i cense f ort w el ve m onths. I n t he pr epr i nt ed pl ea a g re e m e n t i n th e re c o rd , i n th e “ a g re e d re c o m m e n d a ti o n ” s e c ti o n , th e n u m b e rs t w ent y a nd e i ght ee n app ea r i n t he “d aysj ai l ” bl ank ; t w ent y i s han d- w r i t t en on t he app r opr i at e l i ne, an d e i ght ee n i s han d- w r i t t en i m m edi at el y a bovet he t w ent y. A box l abe l ed “DL SU SP” i s al so ch ec ke d on t he pl ea ag r ee m ent , an d
w r i t t en i n a bl ank nex t t o t he che ck box i s “1 y r . ” The r epo rt er ’ s r ec or d oft he pl ea col l oqu y w as notf i l ed w i t h t hi s court , butt he j udg m entr ec i t es t hat A ppel l antw as sent enced “accor di ng t o t he t er m s oft he pl ea bar gai n. ” A ppe l l antf i l ed a m ot i on f orn e w tri alon Dece m ber6, 2006 , as se rt i ng t hathi s pl ea w as i nvol unt ary. The t r i alco urthe l d a he ar i ng on t he m ot i on on Ja nu a ry 19, 2007 . The f ol l ow i ng c ol l oquyoc cur r ed att he hea r i ng: 2 [ D EFENSE C O U N SEL] : O ka y. And, M r . Br ady , on o rab out N ove m ber4t h ors o, you en t er ed a p l ea ofgui l t y t o t he cha r ge of d ri v i n g w h i l e i n to x i c a te d i n th i sc a s e [.] A . Y e s , sir. Q . O ka y. And I be l i eveyou rs ent enc e w as15 days[ si c] an d so m e th i n g l i k e a $ 9 0 0 fi n e [ sic], o r so m e th i n g l i k e tha t.3 A . T e n d a y s[sic ] a n d a $ 6 0 0 -- Q . Ten day s [ si c] and a $6 00 f i ne. N ow , you pl ea bar gai ned and had a l aw yerf ort hatcase? A . Y e s , sir. Q . A nd yo u pl ea bar gai ned -

-f or th a t, and you di d t hat w i l l i ngl y and kno w i ngl y, yes? A . Y e s , sir. Q . O ka y. A nd you w er e i nf or m ed t hat your l i ce ns e w oul d be s u s p e n d e d fo r a p e ri o d o f o n e y e a r? A . (M o v i n g h e a d u p a n d d o w n ). Q . O ka y. And w asi tyou r unde r st and i ng w hen you di d t he pl ea t hatyou w oul d be abl e t o obtai n an occup at i onal l i cense? A . Y e s , sir. Q . O k a y . A n d y o u w e r e n e v e rin f o r m e d t h a te v e n ify o u d id obt ai n an occ upa t i ona l l i ce ns e i t w oul d bet ow ar ds[ si c] ope r at i ng a c om m er ci alve hi cl e d ur i ng t he per i od ofyou rs us pen si on? A . No. Q . An d t h e n y o u we r e n e v e r i n f o r me d t h a t y o u wo u l d be bar r ed f r om ope r at i ng a com m er ci al veh i cl e l ega l l y du r i ng t he per i od ofs us pen si on a nd[ , ] t her ef or e, ha d you kno w n t hat , you w oul d not hav e e nt er ed t he pl ea t hatyou di d? A . T h a t’ s ri g h t. Q . O ka y. [ D EFENSE C O U N SEL] : That ’ s al l I ’ ve got on t hi s pr oce edi ng, Judg e.4 T H E C O U R T : A l l ri g h t. M r . Br ady , di d yo u und er st and , s i r , an d di d I ex pl a i n t o yo u t hatw hen you t ook t hat pl ea , bec aus e I f ol l ow ed t he pl ea ba r gai n, itm e a n ty o u h a d n o rig h tt o a p p e a l? T H E D E F E N D A N T : U m , I b e l i e v e y o u d i d sa ytha t. TH E CO U RT: You bel i eveI di d? T H E D E F E N D A N T : Y e s , ma ’ a m. [ D EFEN S E C O U N S EL] : W e’ r e not di sput i ng t hatt hatoccur r ed bec aus e t he r ec or d s how s t hatoc cur r ed. T H E C O U R T : A ll rig h t . T h a t ’s a ll. [ D EFEN S E C O U N S EL] : O kay. Judg e, f or t he r ecor d, I r equest t h a tt h e C o u rtg r a n ta n e w t r ia l. T H E C O U R T : D e n i e d . A l t hough t he t r i alco urtde ni ed A ppe l l ant ’ s m ot i on f orne w t r i al , i tam end ed t he
cert i f i cat i on of A ppel l ant ’ s rig h tt o appeal f r om “t hi s cr i m i nal case i s a pl ea bar gai n case, and t he def endan thas N O r i ght of appeal ” t o “t hi s cr i m i nal case i s a p l ea - bar gai n c as e, butt he t r i alco urtha s gi ven pe rm i ss i on t o a ppe al , an d t he def en d a n t h ast he r i ghtofap pea l aft erm ot i on f orne w t r i alhe ar i ng on l i m i t ed i ss ue onl y. ” Thi s app ea l f ol l ow ed. D i sc us si on I n h i s fi rst po i nt , App e l l a nta r gu e st ha th i sp l e a w a sn otv ol un t a ry ( 1) because he a g re e d to pl ead gui l t y i n exchan ge f oran ei ghteen- day sent ence, but t he t r i al court sent enced hi m t o t w ent y days i n j ai l and ( 2) because he w as5

m i s i n fo rm e d a b o u t w h e th e r h e w o u l d b e a b l e to o b ta i n a n o c c u p a ti o n a l d ri v e r’s l i c e n se w h i l e h i s p ri v a te d ri v e r’ s l i c e n se w a s s u sp e n d e d . I n h i s s e c o n d p o i n t, he ar gue s t hat t he t r i alco urter r ed by d eny i ng hi s m ot i on f orne w t r i alf ort he
sam e r easons. A gui l t y pl ea, t o be consi st entw i t h due processofl aw , m ustbe ent er ed k n o w i n g l y , i n te l l i g e n tl y , a n d v o l u n ta ri l y . K ni a tt v. S tate , 206 S . W . 3d 657, 664 (T e x . C ri m . A p p .), cert. denied, 12 7 S . C t . 66 7 ( 20 06 ) . To be “vol untary, ” a gui l t y pl ea m ustbe t he expr essi on of t he def endan t ’ s ow n f r ee w i l l and m ust
n o t b e i n d u c e d b y th re a ts , m i s re p re s e n ta ti o n s , o r i m p ro p e r p ro m i s e s . Id. ( ci t i ng Brady v. United S ta tes , 3 9 7 U. S . 7 4 2 , 7 5 5 , 9 0 S . Ct . 1 4 6 3 ( 1 9 7 0 ) ) . An i n v o l u n ta ry g u i l ty p l e a m u s t b e s e t a s i d e . Bo yki nv. A l a b a ma , 395 U. S. 238, 2 4 4 , 8 9 S . C t. 1 7 0 9 , 1 7 1 3 (1 9 6 9 ); W i l l i a m s v. S tate , 522 S. W . 2d 483, 485 ( Tex . C r i m . A pp. 19 75 ) . To det er m i ne w het hera pl ea i s vol untary, w e consi der th e re c o rd a sa w h o l e . W illia m s , 5 2 2 S .W .2 d a t 4 8 5 . I f co u n se l co n v e y s e rr o n e o u s i n fo rm a ti o n to a d e fen d a n t, a p l e a o f gu i l ty b a s e d o n th a t m i s i n fo rm a ti o n i si n v o l u n ta ry . E xp a rteGr

if f in , 679 S. W . 2d 15, 1 7

– 1 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 4 ); Mc G ui re v. S tate , 617 S. W . 2d 259 , 261 ( Tex. C r im . A p p . 1 9 8 1 ). A d e f e n d a n t ’s c la im t h a th e w a sm is in f o r m e d b yc o u n s e l,
s ta n d i n g a l o n e , i sn o t e n o u g h to re n d e r h i s p l e a i n v o l u n ta ry . F i m b erg v. S tate , 9 2 2 S .W .2 d 2 0 5 , 2 0 8 ( T e x . A p p . — H o u s to n [1 s t D is t. ] 1 9 9 6 , p e t. re f’ d ). In
c a s e s i n w h i c h a g u i l typ l e a h a sb e e n h e l d to h a v e b e e n i n v o l u n ta ry , th e re c o rd6

h a s c o n t a in e d co n fi rm a ti o n b yco u n se l o f t h e m i sinfo rm a ti o n o r do c u m e n ts pr ope r l y i n e vi den ceau gm ent i ng t he def end ant ’ s t es t i m o ny t hatr eve al t he
m i s i n fo rm a ti o n a n d s h o w i ts c o n v e y a n c e to th e d e fe n d a n t. S e e, e .g ., Gr if f in , 6 7 9 S .W .2 d a t 1 5 ; Ex p arte Bur ns , 601 S. W . 2d 370 , 372 ( Tex. C r i m . A pp. 1 9 8 0 ); S tate v. Hartm an , 810 S. W . 2d 22, 23 ( Tex. A pp. — Beau m ont1991 , no p e t.); Murph yv. S tate , 6 6 3 S .W .2 d 6 0 4 , 6 1 0 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 s t D i s t.] 1 9 8 3 , n o p e t.). I n t hi s case, A ppel l antt est i f i ed att he hear i ng on hi s m ot i on f or new t r i al t hathe pl eaded gui l t y w i l l i ngl y and know i ngl y. A l t hou gh he ar gues on app eal t hathew as “m i si nf or m ed” and “g i ven m i sl ea di ng i nf or m at i on”

— by w hom , he does not say— abou thi s el i gi bi l i t y f or a com m er ci al dr i ver ’ s l i cense, he t est i f i ed at t he new t r i alhe ar i ng m er el y t hathew as“ nev eri nf or m ed”t hathew oul d be i nel i gi bl e f ora com m er ci al l i cense . E v en i fw e w er e t o l i ber al l y i nt er pr et A p p e l l a n t ’s t e s t im o n yt o m e a n t h a tt r ia l c o u n s e l m is in f o r m e d h im a b o u th is el i gi bi l i t y f or a com m er ci al dr i ver ’ s l i ce ns e, hi s t es t i m ony, s t and i ng a l one , i s not
e n o u g h to re n d e r h i sp l e a i n v o l u n ta ry . S ee F i m b erg , 9 2 2 S .W .2 d a t 2 0 8 . W e t her ef or e hol d t hatA ppel l anthas f ai l ed t o show t hatm i si nf or m at i on f r om t r i al
cou ns el oran y ot hers our cer end er ed hi s pl ea i nvol unt ary. W i t h r ega r d t o Appel l ant ’ s con t ent i on t hatt he t r i alco urtdi d notf ol l ow t h e b a r g a in e d -f o rp le a a g r e e m e n ta n d s e n t e n c e d h im t o a n e x t r a t w o d a y sin j ai l , A ppel l anthas notpr eserved hi s com pl ai ntf orr evi ew . To pres erve a7

c o m p la in t f o r o u r r e v ie w , a p a rt ym u s th a v e p r e s e n t e d t o t h e t r ia l c o u rta t im e ly
r equest , o b ject i on, orm ot i on t hatst at es t he speci f i c gr oun ds f ort he desi r ed
r ul i ng i ft heyar e n otap par entf r om t he con t extoft he r equ es t , obj ec t i on, or
m o ti o n . T EX . R. A PP . P . 3 3 .1 (a )(1 ); Mo sleyv. S tate , 983 S. W . 2d 249, 265 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 8 ) (o p . o n re h ’g ), c ert. deni e d , 5 2 6 U .S . 1 0 7 0 (1 9 9 9 ). F u rt h e r , t h e t r i a l c o u rt mu s t h a v e r u l e d o n t h e r e q u e s t , o bj e c t i o n , orm ot i on, e i th e r ex p res sly o r i m p l i c i tl y , o r t h e co m p l a in in g p a rt ym u st h a v e o bj e c ted to th e tri a l c o u rt’sre fu s a l to ru l e . T EX . R. A PP . P . 3 3 .1 (a )(2 ); Men dez v. S tate , 138 S .W .3 d 3 3 4 , 3 4 1 (T e x . C r im . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ). P r e s e rv a t io n o f e r r o r is a s y s t e m ic
re q u i re m e n t th a t th i sc o u rt s h o u l d re v i e w o n i ts o w n m o ti o n . A rchie v. State, 2 2 1 S .W .3 d 6 9 5 , 6 9 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ); Jones v. State, 942 S. W . 2d 1, 2 n .1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ). N o th i n g i n th e re c o rd s u g g e s ts th a t A p p e l l a n t c o m p l a i n e d to th e tri a l c o u rt t h a titf a ile d t o f o llo w t h e p le a a g r e e m e n t ; t h u s , A p p e lla n th a sw a iv e d h is
c o m p l a i n t. S e eLa n um v. S tate , 9 5 2 S .W .2 d 3 6 , 4 0 (T e x . A p p .— S a n A n t o n io 1 9 9 7 , n o p e t. ) (ho ld in g d e fen d a n t w a i v e d co m p l a i n t t h a t t ri a l co u rtfai l e d to f ol l ow pl ea ag r ee m ent w hen he di d notobj ec tats ent enc i ng ori n a m ot i on f or
n e w tri a l ). Even i fA ppel l ant had pr eserved er r or by r ai si ng hi s com pl ai nti n t he t r i al
court , hi s com pl ai nti s notsupport ed by t he r ecor d. Bo t h “20 ” and “18 ” appear
o n t h e p le a a g r e e m e n tin t h e “ d a y s ja il”b la n k , a n d A p p e lla n td o e sn o te x p la in8

w hy t he l at t err ef l ect s hi s r eal agr eem entw i t h t he S t at e. A tt he new t r i al hea r i ng, bot h A ppe l l ant and cou ns el w er e w r ong a boutt he ac t uals ent enc e, an d
n e i th e r m e n ti o n e d e i g h te e n d a y s a s th e a g re e d -u p o n o r a c tu a l s e n te n c e . M o re si gni f i cant l y, w hen asked by t he t r i al court , A ppel l ant agr eed t hat t he courthad fo l l o w e d t he pl ea ag r ee m ent , oratl ea stdi d notdi sa gr eew i t h t he cou rt’s
re p re s e n ta ti o n th a t i t h a d fo l l o w e d th e a g re e m e n t. Fort hese r easons, w e over r ul e A ppel l ant ’ s f i r stpoi nt . For th e sam e
r e a s o n s , w e h o ld t h a tt h e t r ia l c o u rt d id n o t a b u s e it sd is c r e t io n b yd e n y in g h is
m o ti o n for n e w tr i a l , a n d w e o v e rr u l e h i s s e c o n d p o i n t. C onc l us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d b o th o f A p p e l l a n t’sp o i n ts , w e a ffir m th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

A N N E GA RD N ER J U S T I C E PA N EL F: C A YC E, C. J. ; G A RD N ER and M C C O Y, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: J ul y 3, 2008