Steven DeWayne Pruitt v. State

ACCEPTED
06-14-00051-CR
SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS
TEXARKANA, TEXAS
2/2/2015 3:13:00 PM
DEBBIE AUTREY
CLERK
No. 06-14-00051-CR, 06-14-00058-CR, 06-14-00059
____________________________________________FILED IN
6th COURT OF APPEALS
TEXARKANA, TEXAS
IN THE 2/4/2015 9:48:00 AM
DEBBIE AUTREY
SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS Clerk
AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS
____________________________________________
STEVEN DEWAYNE PRUITT,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
____________________________________________
APPEAL FROM
TH
THE 8 DISTRICT COURT OF HOPKINS COUNTY, TEXAS
TRIAL COURT NO. 1323371, 1323451, 1323452
____________________________________________
APPELLEE’S BRIEF
____________________________________________
Will W. Ramsay
110 Main Street
Sulphur Springs, TX 75482
903.885.0641, f. 903.885.0640
wramsay@hopkinscountytx.com
Attorney for Appellee
State of Texas
ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED
Appellee’s Brief
I DENTITY OF P ARTIES AND C OUNSEL
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38(a), the following is a list of all
parties to the trial court’s judgment and the names and addresses of all trial and
appellate counsel:
Appellant Appellant’s appellate counsel
Steven Dewayne Pruitt Martin Braddy
121 Oak Avenue, Suite A
Sulphur Springs, TX 75482
903.885.2040 telephone
903.885.2704 facsimile
Appellant’s trial counsel
Heath Hyde
214 Connally Street
Sulphur Springs, TX 75482
903.439.0000 telephone
Appellee Appellee’s trial & appellate counsel
The State of Texas Will Ramsay
8TH Judicial District Attorney
110 Main Street
Sulphur Springs, TX 75482
903.885.0641 telephone
903.885.0640 facsimile
wramsay@hopkinscountytx.com
Appellee’s Brief Page i
T ABLE OF C ONTENTS
Identity of Parties and Counsel ............................................................................ i
Table of Contents ................................................................................................ ii
Index of Authorities............................................................................................ iii
Statement of the Case ...........................................................................................2
Issues Presented....................................................................................................3
SOLE POINT OF ERROR: Appellant’s pleas were not made
voluntarily.
Statement of Facts ...............................................................................................4
Summary of the Argument ...................................................................................5
Argument.......................................................................................................... 5-8
POINT OF ERROR NO. 1: Appellant’s pleas were made voluntarily as there
were no improper admonishments under Article 26.13 and the record shows
signed plea agreements as proof of voluntariness ................................................5
Prayer....................................................................................................................8
Certificate of Word Count....................................................................................9
Certificate of Service............................................................................................9
Appellee’s Brief Page ii
I NDEX OF A UTHORITIES
Cases
These arguments are based upon the Code of Criminal Procedure and the direct
evidence contained within the clerk’s file and the reporter’s record.
Statutes
TEX. CODE CRIM. P. art. 26.13………………………………………………… 5, 6
Appellee’s Brief Page iii
No. 06-14-00051-CR, 06-14-00058-CR, 06-14-00059
____________________________________________
IN THE
SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS
AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS
____________________________________________
STEVEN DEWAYNE PRUITT,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
____________________________________________
APPEAL FROM
TH
THE 8 DISTRICT COURT OF HOPKINS COUNTY, TEXAS
TRIAL COURT NO. 1323371, 1323451, 1323452
____________________________________________
APPELLEE’S BRIEF
____________________________________________
Appellee’s Brief Page 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellee believes that the Appellant has accurately and succinctly given the
Statement of the Case in his brief and would adopt his version as follows:
Appellant was indicted in Cause Number 1323451 for Delivery of
Marijuana, 5 pounds or less but more than a quarter ounce alleged to
have occurred in a drug free zone. Appellant was indicted in Cause
Number 1323452 for a second case of Delivery of Marijuana, 5
pounds or less but more than a quarter ounce alleged to have occurred
in a drug free zone. Appellant was also indicted in Cause Number
1323371 for Burglary of a Habitation. Appellant pled “guilty” in each
case and was sentenced by the trial court without the benefit of a plea
agreement with the State of Texas. Although the burglary case was
tried on its merits before the trial court prior to Appellant’s guilty plea
on that case, all three cases were handled together by the court and
Appellant was sentenced at the same time in each case.
The trial court sentenced Appellant to two year in the Institutional
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in Cause
Number 1323451. In Cause Numbers 1323452 and 1323371, the trial
court found that the evidence substantiated Appellant’s guilt in each
case and deferred a finding of guilt and placed Appellant on probation
for ten years and assessed a fine of $1,500.00 in each case. The trial
court also entered a Deadly Weapon finding in Cause Number
1323371. The trial court certified Appellant’s right to appeal in each
case and Appellant timely filed a Notice of Appeal. (Brief for
Appellant pgs. 7-8)
Appellee’s Brief Page 2
I SSUES P RESENTED
SOLE POINT OF ERROR: Appellant’s pleas were not made
voluntarily.
Appellee’s Brief Page 3
S TATEMENT OF F ACTS
Counsel for appellant has written a Statement of Facts that is approximately
4-5 pages in length. (Brief for Appellant pgs. 8-13) The “facts” of this appeal deal
with the procedural tract of the litigation as opposed to the underlying events
constituting the crime. For that reason, Appellee adopts the aforementioned and
very detailed Statement of Facts set forth in the Brief for Appellant.
Appellee’s Brief Page 4
S UMMARY OF THE A RGUMENT
SOLE POINT OF ERROR: Appellant’s pleas were voluntary as there were no
improper admonishments under Article 26.13 and the record shows signed plea
agreements as proof of voluntariness.
A RGUMENT
Appellant complains that the trial court violated Article 26.13 of the Texas
Code of Criminal Procedure in that the court improperly admonished the defendant
prior to commencing the trial before the court. Appellant’s arguments are
misplaced for the following reasons.
A. Regarding the Correct Punishment Range
Appellant complains that he was admonished on the incorrect punishment
range at the initial plea hearing (wherein he actually pleaded not guilty). First of
all, the “admonishments” complained of at the first hearing were not
“admonishments” under Article 26.13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Article
26.13 is entitled “Plea of Guilty”. See Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Ann. Article 26.13
(West). In fact, the very first sentence of that article reads as follows: “Prior to
accepting a plea of guilty or a plea of nolo contendere, the court shall admonish
the defendant of….” See id. (emphasis added). This article applies solely to pleas
of guilty and nolo contendere. What the trial court stated prior to beginning the
trial on the merits were not “admonishments” as a defendant would receive during
Appellee’s Brief Page 5
a plea hearing. The trial court was simply putting on the record the “lay of the
land” to make sure that all parties had the same understanding of the posture of the
case. Based on Appellant’s plea of “not guilty”, Article 26.13 was not triggered
and no statutory admonishments were necessary at that point.
Notwithstanding the above, prior to the trial starting, the following exchange
took place in open court after the conclusion of a bench conference:
THE COURT:··All right.··We're going to·proceed, then,
with this as the intent to commit an·assault.··And if the
State also -- if they can prove·that, and if they can further
prove there was the use·or exhibition of a deadly
weapon, that could present·a deadly weapon finding, but
the punishment range·would be 2 to 20, and the deadly
weapon finding, if·all of that is made, would simply
aggravate the parole rules. Is that your
understanding,·Mr. Ramsay?
MR. RAMSAY:··Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT:··Mr. Hyde?
MR. HYDE:··Yes, Your Honor.
(R.R. Vol. 3 pg. 12).
Regardless of the fact that the trial court was under no obligation to
“admonish” the Defendant, all parties were aware that the indictment alleged a 2nd
Degree Felony and the trial would proceed accordingly. So, regardless of the fact
that it was unnecessary, the applicable punishment range was put on the record in
the presence of the Defendant.
Appellee’s Brief Page 6
B. Regarding the Deferred Adjudication Discussion and the
Voluntariness of the Plea
Secondly, any issue regarding an incorrect “admonishment” (again, this term
is used loosely) as to the eligibility of deferred adjudication was cured by allowing
the Defendant to change his plea. After realizing that deferred adjudication was
not available from the judge with a plea of “not guilty”, the judge allowed the
Defendant to withdraw his plea of not guilty and enter a plea of “guilty.” In doing
so, the Defendant, once again, completed the standard plea papers, which
enumerated the many rights he enjoys in every criminal case. He signed the plea
papers freely, voluntarily and knowingly waiving each and every one of those
rights except for the right to appeal. All of his rights, including the right to a jury
trial, were included in the plea papers and he freely, voluntarily, and knowingly
waived those rights. See (Clerk’s Record pgs. 27-32).
Appellant draws the picture of “two options” that were available for the
Defendant. No, there were other options available, but the Defendant made it clear
that it was his intent to plead guilty because that was his hope of getting deferred
adjudication. See (R.R. Vol. 4 p. 10-11). Under oath, the Defendant stated that he
was making the plea “freely and voluntarily,” that it was what he wanted to do, and
no one else was making him do it. See id. at 13-14.
Appellee’s Brief Page 7
Unfortunately, the result was not what Appellant wanted. But that does not
change the fact that the record shows his pleas to be made freely, voluntarily and
knowingly.
P RAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Appellee, State of Texas, respectfully
requests that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.
Respectfully submitted,
By: //s// Will Ramsay
Will Ramsay
8th Judicial District Attorney
State Bar #24039129
110 Main Street
Sulphur Springs, TX 75482
903.885.0641, f. 903.885.0640
willramsay@hopkinscountytx.com
Attorney for Appellee
State of Texas
Appellee’s Brief Page 8
C ERTIF ICATE OF W ORD C OUNT
Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(3), this document contains 1,502 words.
__/s/ Will Ramsay_
Will Ramsay
C ERTIF ICATE OF S ERVICE
This is to certify that on February 2, 2015, I served a true and correct copy
of the above and foregoing Appellant’s Brief by email on Martin Braddy, Attorney
for Appellant.
__/s/ Will Ramsay_
Will Ramsay
Appellee’s Brief Page 9