KEVYN KYON THOMAS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

AFFIRM as modified; Opinion issued September 16, 2010
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-09-00847-CR
No. 05-09-00848-CR
No. 05-09-00849-CR
No. 05-09-00850-CR
No. 05-09-00851-CR
No. 05-09-00852-CR
No. 05-09-00853-CR
............................
KEVYN KYON THOMAS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
.............................................................
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F08-44796-UI, F09-15675-UI, F09-15676-UI, F09-15677-UI,
F09-15678-UI, F09-15679-UI, F09-21889-UI
 
.............................................................
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Francis and Fillmore
Opinion By Chief Justice Wright
        Kevyn Kyon Thomas appeals from his convictions in these seven cases. In a single point of error in each case, appellant contends the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear the cases and render judgments. We modify and affirm in one case, and we affirm in the remaining six cases. The background of the cases and the evidence adduced at trial are well known to the parties, and therefore we limit our recitation of the facts. We issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1 because the law to be applied in the case is well settled.
Background
 
        Appellant waived a jury and pleaded guilty to unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (UUMV) (cause no. 05-09-00847-CR), evading arrest or detention (cause no. 05-09-00848-CR), burglary of a vehicle (cause nos. 05-09-00849-CR, 05-09-00850-CR, and 05-09-00851-CR), burglary of a habitation (cause no. 05-09-00852-CR), and theft of a firearm (cause no. 05-09-00853-CR). See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 30.02(a), 30.04(a), 31.03(a), (e)(4)(C), 31.07(a), 38.04(a) (West 2003 & Supp. 2010). After finding appellant guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at forty years' imprisonment and a $10,000 fine for the burglary of a habitation conviction, ten years' imprisonment for the UUMV and theft convictions, and two years' confinement in a state jail facility for the evading arrest and burglary of a vehicle convictions.
No Transfer Orders
 
        In his sole point of error in each case, appellant complains Criminal District Court No. 2 lacked jurisdiction over these cases because they were not properly transferred to the court's docket. The indictments in these cases were returned in the 291st Judicial District Court, but the record contains no order transferring the cases to Criminal District Court No. 2, where the cases were heard and the judgments rendered. The State responds that appellant failed to preserve his complaints for appellate review because he did not file pleas to the jurisdiction and, alternatively, no transfer orders were required in these cases.
        A grand jury formed and impaneled by a district judge inquires “into all offenses liable to indictment,” and hears all the testimony available before voting on whether to indict an accused. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 20.09, 20.19 (West 2005); Ex parte Edone, 740 S.W.2d 446, 448 (1987). A grand jury is “often characterized as an arm of the court by which it is appointed rather than an autonomous entity.” Dallas Cnty. Dist. Attorney v. Doe, 969 S.W.2d 537, 542 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1998, no pet.). After the conclusion of testimony, a grand jury votes “as to the presentment of an indictment.” Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 20.19. Following presentment, an indictment is filed in a court with competent jurisdiction, i.e., jurisdiction to hear the case. See Hultin v. State, 171 Tex. Crim. 425, 434-35, 351 S.W.2d 248, 255 (1961). In counties having two or more district courts, the judges of the courts may adopt rules governing the filing, numbering, and assignment of cases for trial, and the distribution of the courts' work they consider necessary or desirable to conduct the business of the courts. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 24.304 (West 2004); see also Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 74.093 (West Supp. 2010) (addressing adoption of local rules of administration to provide, in part, for assignment, docketing, transfer, and hearing of all cases). Thus, a specific district court may impanel a grand jury, however, it does not necessarily follow that all cases returned by that grand jury are assigned to that court. See Bourque v. State, 156 S.W.3d 675, 678 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2005, pet. ref'd).
        In these cases, the records show the grand jury was impaneled in the 291st Judicial District Court. Following the return of the indictments, the cases were filed in Criminal District Court No. 2. Nothing in the records indicate these cases were originally filed in or appeared on the trial docket of the 291st Judicial District Court. Because Criminal District Court No. 2 had jurisdiction to hear appellant's cases and render the judgments, we overrule appellant's sole point of error in each case.
Modify Judgment
 
        In a cross-point, the State contends that in cause no. 05-09-00852-CR, the trial court orally pronounced a $10,000 fine when it imposed the forty-year sentence. The trial court's judgment, however, recites the fine as “N/A.” We have reviewed the record and conclude the trial court did orally pronounce a fine that was not included in the judgment. When a conflict exists between the oral pronouncement and the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls. See Coffey v. State, 979 S.W.2d 326, 328 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). We sustain the State's cross-point.
Conclusion
 
        We modify the trial court's judgment in cause no. 05-09-00852-CR to include the $10,000 fine. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd). We affirm the trial court's judgment as modified.
        We affirm the trial court's judgments in all of the remaining cases.
 
 
                                                          
                                                          CAROLYN WRIGHT
                                                          CHIEF JUSTICE
 
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
090847F.U05