|
|
|
|
Opinion filed March 9, 2006
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________
No. 11-05-00165-CR
__________
CHRISTOPHER WAYNE BAKER, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 104th District Court
Taylor County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 14512-B
O P I N I O N
This is an appeal from a judgment adjudicating guilt. We dismiss.
On December 15, 2003, Christopher Wayne Baker entered a plea of no contest to the first count of an indictment charging him with two counts of sexual assault of a child and a third count of indecency with a child. Appellant pled true to an enhancement paragraph in which it was alleged that appellant had previously been convicted of a felony. Appellant signed written plea admonishments and stipulated to the evidence. The trial court deferred the adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for ten years. On January 14, 2005, the State filed a motion to revoke his community supervision and adjudicate guilt. Appellant entered pleas of true to the State=s allegations that he violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision. On April 1, 2005, appellant was adjudicated guilty of the offense and sentenced to twenty years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.
In his sole issue on appeal, appellant challenges the validity of his plea based on involuntariness. Specifically, he argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for new trial because the evidence showed that appellant did not freely and voluntarily enter his plea of no contest.
Article 42.12, section 5(b) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure precludes an appeal challenging the trial court=s determination to proceed with the adjudication of guilt. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, ' 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2005); Phynes v. State, 828 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Olowosuko v. State, 826 S.W.2d 940 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). A defendant placed on deferred adjudication community supervision may raise issues relating to the original plea proceeding only in appeals taken when deferred adjudication community supervision is first imposed. Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 659 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). This includes complaints about the voluntariness of the prior plea of guilty and complaints of ineffective assistance of counsel. In Jordan v. State, 54 S.W.3d 783, 785 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reaffirmed the holding of Manuel and explained that, although there may be some exceptions to the prohibition against attacking the original conviction upon revocation of deferred adjudication probation, A[a]n >involuntary plea= does not constitute one of those rare situations.@ Consequently, we have no authority to address appellant=s sole issue.
The appeal is dismissed.
JIM R. WRIGHT
CHIEF JUSTICE
March 9, 2006
Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., and
McCall, J., and Strange, J.