Jason David Sheedy v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 262nd District Court of Harris County

Opinion issued September 20, 2007

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

NO. 01-06-00465-CR

JASON DAVID SHEEDY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 966626

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jason David Sheedy, pleaded guilty, without an agreed punishment recommendation, to an indictment charging aggravated sexual assault of a child. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. 22.021(a)(1)(B), (2), (b) (Vernon Supp. 2006). The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for 10 years and assessed a $10,000.00 fine.

The State later filed a motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of community supervision. Appellant pleaded not true to the allegations. The trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child, and assessed appellant's punishment at 60 years in prison and a $10,000.00 fine.

In his sole point of error, appellant contends the trial court erred in not vacating his conviction and setting aside the deferred-adjudication order because appellant initially pleaded guilty in an unsworn statement. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon 2005) (requiring State to introduce sufficient evidence showing defendant's guilt when defendant pleads guilty).

Appellant may not appeal the trial court's determination to proceed with an adjudication of guilt on the original charge. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, 5(b) (Vernon 2006); Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661-62 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Any complaints about the original plea proceeding, including evidentiary sufficiency, must be raised on appeal when deferred adjudication is first imposed. Manuel, 994 S.W.2d at 661-62. The Court of Criminal Appeals has recognized two exceptions: a void judgment and habeas corpus. Nix v. State, 65 S.W.3d 664, 667 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). In this appeal, appellant claims the deferred-adjudication order is void because appellant initially pleaded guilty in an unsworn statement.

We disagree. In Nix, the Court of Criminal Appeals explained that judgments are void only in very rare situations: (1) the document purporting to be a charging instrument, i.e., the indictment, information, or complaint, does not satisfy the constitutional requisites of a charging instrument; (2) the trial court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the offense charged; (3) the record reflects that there is no evidence to support the conviction; or (4) an indigent defendant is required to face criminal trial proceedings without appointed counsel, when such has not been waived. Nix, 65 S.W.3d at 668.

The record contains other signed, sworn documents that appellant executed contemporaneously with the signed, but unsworn guilty plea. Appellant cites no authority for the proposition that the mere lack of an acknowledgment on a guilty plea in this situation constitutes no evidence to support the conviction. Without deciding whether there was error in accepting appellant's signed, unsworn guilty plea, we hold that the order deferring adjudication of guilt is not void. Accordingly, we have no jurisdiction to hear appellant's allegation of error in this appeal of the State's motion to adjudicate.

We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Sam Nuchia

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Hanks, and Bland.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).