Nduka, Ejikeme Okechukwu v. Texas, the State Of ( 1998 )

(£aurt of Appeals
IFtfttj Itsirtrt of ©*>xas at lallas
JUDGMENT
EJIKEME OKECHUKWU NDUKA, Appeal from the 291st Judicial District
Appellant Court of Dallas County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No.
F94-00169-HU).
No. 05-94-01959-CR V. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice
Thomas, Justices Bridges and Roach also
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is
AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered September 15, 1998.
LR810 S.W.2d 372, 391 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991) (op. on reh'g); Gottson, 940 S.W.2d 181, 187 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996, pet.
ref d). In the plea papers, appellant waived the right to the appearance, confrontation, and
cross-examination of witnesses. Appellant further consented to written stipulation of the
evidence and agreed to the introduction of his judicial confession into evidence. Appellant
judicially confessed his guilt to the offense as charged. SeeDinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343,
353 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (op. on reh'g) (en banc); Wright v. State, 930 S.W.2d 131, 133
(Tex. App.--Dallas 1996, no pet.) (judicial confession sufficiently proves guilt). Appellant
never retracted his judicial confession to the offense. Furthermore, appellant did not
produce Mitchell or a new affidavit. Thus, there was no evidence of Mitchell's proposed
testimony or the fact that she was still willing to testify on appellant's behalf. On this
record, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant's
motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Accordingly, we overrule appellant's sole point of error
and affirm the trial court's judgment.
LINDA THOMAS
CHIEF JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
-3-