--------.. -------- --· -~---- ~- -------~-- -------

AFFIRM; Opinion issued January 16, 2013. 

In The 

QI:ourt of appeal~ 

jfiftb 11i~id of 'atexa~ at Jlalla~ 

No. 05-11-01071-CR 

PEARLINE W. ROBERTS, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3 

· Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F10-61237-J 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices O'Neill, FitzGerald, and Lang-Miers 

Opinion by Justice O'Neill 

Appellant appeals an order revoking her probation. Appellant pleaded true to the 

allegations in the State's motion to revoke in exchange for the State's recommendation of a 180-

day sentence. The trial court did not follow the plea agreement and assessed punishment at twoyears' confmement. In her sole point of error, appellant contends the trial court abused its 

discretion in assessing the two-year sentence without first giving her an opportunity to withdraw 

her plea, thereby rendering the plea involuntary. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial 

court's order. 

1 
Appellant initially pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. The terms of 

the plea agreement required appellant to participate in a Substance Abuse Punishment Facility 

Special Needs (SAPF) Program for not less than ninety-days or more than twelve months and 

comply with all rules and regulations of the program. Appellant refused to enter the SAPF 

program and the State filed a motion to revoke shortly thereafter. Appellant agreed to plead true 

to the allegations in the State's motion to revoke if the State would recommend a 180-day· 

sentence. At the revocation hearing, the trial court informed appellant the court was not 

required to follow the plea agreement. However, the trial court also told appellant she would be 

allowed to withdraw her plea if the trial court did not follow the plea agreement. 

Appellant then pleaded true to the allegations in the State's motion to revoke. The trial 

court did not follow the plea agreement and sentenced appellant to two-years' confmement. In 

this appeal, appellant asserts her plea was rendered involuntary when the trial court did not give 

her an opportunity to withdraw her plea before sentencing her. It is undisputed that, unlike in a 

guilty plea case, a trial court is not required to allow a defendant to withdraw a negotiated plea of 

true even if the court does not follow a plea agreement. Gutierrez v. State, 108 S.W.3d 304, 309 

(Tex. Crirn. App. 2003). Appellant however contends "once the trial court gave appellant the 

right to withdraw her plea, the trial court abused its discretion by refusing this right. making 

appellant's plea involuntary." 

The State asserts appellant waived error by not requesting the trial court to allow her to 

withdraw her plea or otherwise object at the plea hearing or in a motion for new trial. Rule 

33.l(a) requires an appellant to raise a timely objection in the trial court as a prerequisite to 

raising an error on appeal. An exception exists only for absolute systemic requirements or 

nonwaivable rights. Mendez v. State, 138 S.W.3d 334, 350 (Tex. Crirn. App. 2004). Failure to 

2 
;---~---------- - --- . --~-~----- --~ -~- --·· -------- ·- ---·- ----- -----

permit a defendant to withdraw a plea is not such a requirement. See id. Likewise, questions 

concerning the voluntariness of a guilty plea do not fall within the definition of such 

"fundamental" requirements. Williams v. State, 10 S.W.3d 788, 789 (Tex. App.-Waco 2000, 

pet. refd). We conclude appellant waived her complaints relating to the trial court's refusal to 

permit her to withdraw her plea by failing to request withdrawal by timely objection or motion 

for new trial. We resolve the sole issue against appellant and affirm the trial court's judgment. 

Do Not Publish 

TEx. R. APP. P. 47 

111071F.U05 

3 
Qrourt of App-eals 

lJitfth, ili.strid of wexa.s at ilalla.s 

Pearline W. Roberts, Appellant 

No. 05-11-01071-CR V. 

The State of Texas, Appellee 

-JUDGMENT 

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 

No.3, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. Fl0-61237-J. 

Opinion delivered by Justice O'Neill. 

Justices FitzGerald and Lang-Miers 

participating. 

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered this 16th day of January, 2013.