Court Opinion

ID: 9811812
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:29:33.1302+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:21:39.736224
License: Public Domain

TOM B. RAMEY, JR., Chief Justice (Retired),
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Judge Kent’s unique “timely pass for plea” proceeding is *100a comparable state procedure to a standard plea bargain and is embraced by Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure as contemplated by Tex.R. Evid. 410(3). Under the majority’s opinion Bowie is improperly prejudiced because the trial court chose to use the “timely pass for plea” procedure rather than a standard plea bargain. The trial court properly suppressed Bowie’s statements during the course of and relating to his plea of guilty. See Bowie v. State, No. 05-02-00527-CR, 2003 WL 568905 (Tex.App.-Dallas February 28, 2003, no pet. h.) (not designated for publication), 2003 WL 568905, at *2.