Court Opinion

ID: 2918907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 00:10:31.92864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:47.438032
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-99-611-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________

RAYMOND DAVID HALE, II,	Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,	Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 156th District Court
of Live Oak County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and

Rodriguez

Opinion by Chief Justice Seerden

	Raymond David Hale, II, appellant, was charged with unauthorized
use of a motor vehicle.(1)  He was simultaneously charged in federal court
with another offense.  After a plea bargain agreement was reached,
appellant pleaded guilty to the State court offense on the condition that
his state and federal sentences would run concurrently.  However,
appellant's state and federal sentences are not now running
concurrently and the plea bargain agreement cannot be fulfilled.  The
State concedes this point.  

	When a defendant pleads guilty pursuant to a plea agreement, but
the terms of the agreement cannot be fulfilled, the defendant is entitled
to withdraw his guilty plea. See Ex parte Austin, 746 S.W.2d 226, 227
(Tex. Crim. App. 1988).  The State agrees that remand to permit
appellant to withdraw his plea is appropriate here.

	We reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause
for further proceedings herein. 

  
	ROBERT J. SEERDEN, Chief Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this

16th day of November, 2000.

1.   Tex. Penal Code Ann. §31.07(a) (Vernon 1998).