in Re: Craig Watkins ( 2012 )

‘Writ of ‘Iandamus Conditionally Granted; Opinion issued November 13, 2012
In The
Qunrt uf pprat
.FiftI! Distrirt Uf cxu at 1a11as
No. 05-12-01315-CV
IN RE CRAIG WATKINS, CRIMINAL DISTRICT
ATTORNEY OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, Relator
Original Proceeding from the 282nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F10-42330-S and F12-40559-S
OPINION
Before Justices Morris. Richter. and Lang-Miers
Opinion by Justice Morris
This is an original mandamus proceeding. Relator Craig Watkins filed with us his petition
seeking relief after the trial judge permitted real party in interest, Luis Enrique Pena, to waive ajury
and plead guilty without the State’s consent to the jury waiver. Mandamus is appropriate in a
criminal proceeding when the relator establishes: 1) “that he has no adequate remedy at law to
redress the harm that he alleges will ensue,” and 2) “that the act he seeks to compel or prohibit does
not involve a discretionary orjudicial decision.” Simon v. Levario. 306 S.W.3d 318. 320 (Tex. Crirn.
App. 2009) (orig. proceeding); see also State of Tex. ex rd. Hill v. Court ofAppeals for the Fifth
Dist., 34 S.W.3d 924, 927 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (orig. proceeding). Relator has established his
entitlement to reliet and we therefore conditionally grant the writ of mandamus.
Real party in interest Luis Enrique Pena was charged with possession of a controlled
substance on two separate occasions. and his case was set for trial before a jury on September 5.
2012. That morning, the trial judge permitted Pena to waive his right to ajury trial and plead guilty
over the State’s objection. According to the tn al judge’s response to relator’s petition. he took such
action so he could consider Pena’s request lir deferred adjudication. a punishment that may not be
assessed by aury. See TEx. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. Art. 42.12. §5 (West Supp. 2011).
The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. however, clearly states that a defendant can only
waive his right to a trial by jury if the State consents and approves. TEx. CoDE CRIM. PROC. ANN.
Art. 1.13(a) (West Supp. 2012). Further. the court of criminal appeals long ago concluded that
“defendants accused of felony offenses have a constitutional right to trial by jury. but do not have
a constitutional protected right to waive trial bvlurv.” in re Roach, No. 05-09-0 145 1 -CV. 2010 WL
537751, at *3 (Tex. App.--Dallas Feb. 17, 2010, orig. proceeding) (citing Slate cx rd. Turner v.
McDonald, 676 S .W.2d 371, 373 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984, orig. proceeding). Because the trial court
had no discretion to disregard Article 1 .1 3(a). and because the State has no adequate remedy at law
to redress the failure to have a jury trial without its consent and approval, relator is entitled to the
writ he seeks. Simon. 306 S.W.3d at 321.
Accordingly, we conditionally grant relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. The writ will
issue only in the event the trial judge fails to withdraw his acceptance of the guilty pleas entered in
cause numbers F 10-42330-S and F12-40559-S. withdraw his ruling denying the State’s request for
a trial by jury. and withdraw his factual findings related to real party in interest’s guilty pleas made
on September 5, 2012.
MORRIS
STICE
l2l315F.P05