|
|
|
|
Opinion filed September 25, 2008
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________
No. 11-07-00296-CR
__________
DENA J. ALDRIDGE, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1024030D
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
The trial court convicted Dena J. Aldridge, upon her plea of guilty, of prostitution with three prior convictions. A plea bargain agreement was not reached. The trial court assessed her punishment at confinement for six months in a state jail facility. We affirm.
Issue on Appeal
In her sole point of error on appeal, appellant contends that her guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Appellant argues that the trial court failed to properly admonish her under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13 (Vernon Supp. 2008) as to punishment. Specifically, appellant argues that, because the trial court Afailed to inform [a]ppellant that the range of punishment included a possible fine not to exceed $10,000,@ reversible statutory error occurred.
Definition of Offense, Applicable Punishment, and Admonishments Given
Tex. Penal Code Ann. ' 43.02 (Vernon 2003) defines the offense of prostitution and declares that, if the defendant has three or more prior prostitution convictions, the offense is a state jail felony. The punishment authorized for a person convicted of a state jail felony is confinement in a state jail facility for Aany term of not more than two years or less than 180 days.@ Tex. Penal Code Ann. ' 12.35 (Vernon Supp. 2008). Section 12.35(b) further provides that A[i]n addition to confinement, an individual adjudged guilty of a state jail felony may be punished by a fine not to exceed $10,000@ (emphasis added). The written plea admonishments signed by appellant, her trial counsel, counsel for the State, and the trial court stated in part that, if Aconvicted of the above offense, you face the following range of punishment: A term of not less than 180 days or more than 2 years in a state jail; and in addition, a fine not to exceed $10,000 may also be assessed@ (emphasis added).
Substantial Compliance Under Article 26.13
Article 26.13(c) provides that Asubstantial compliance by the trial court is sufficient, unless the defendant affirmatively shows that he was not aware of the consequences of his plea and that he was misled or harmed by the admonishment of the court.@ The trial court=s actual admonishment that a fine Amay also be assessed@ sufficiently tracked the wording of Section 12.35(b) that a person convicted of a state jail felony Amay be punished by a fine@ and resulted in substantial compliance as required under Article 26.13(c). Moreover, appellant makes no argument as to how she has been harmed or misled and has failed to meet the Article 26.13(c) affirmative showing requirement. See Aguirre-Mata v. State, 125 S.W.3d 473, 476-77 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Burnett v. State, 88 S.W.3d 633, 638 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). The sole point of error is overruled.
This Court=s Ruling
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
RICK STRANGE
JUSTICE
September 25, 2008
Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.