Celis Francisco v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 1, 2007
• Docket: 14-06-00332-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 1, 2007

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 1, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00332-CR

FRANCISCO CELIS, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1004295

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant Francisco Celis, Jr. was indicted for aggravated sexual assault of a child.  He waived his right to a jury trial and pleaded guilty.  The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to five years= imprisonment.

Appellant=s appeal challenges the constitutionality of article 1.15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs guilty pleas in felony cases.  Article 1.15 states that even when a felony defendant waives his right to a jury trial and pleads guilty, Ait shall be necessary for the state to introduce evidence into the record showing the guilt of the defendant and said evidence shall be accepted by the court as the basis for its judgment and in no event shall a person charged be convicted upon his plea without sufficient evidence to support the same.@  Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon 2005).  In his first two issues, appellant claims this statute violates his state and federal rights to compulsory process because, under his interpretation, the statute prohibits a defendant from putting on any evidence.  In his third and fourth issues, appellant asserts he did not waive these rights.  In Vanderburg v. State, 681 S.W.2d 713, 716B18 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 1984, pet. ref=d), we rejected these exact arguments, and we have repeatedly and consistently continued to reject them in a line of unpublished cases since then.  See Jackson v. State, No. 14-05-00329-CR, 2007 WL 608473, at *6 & n.6 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] Mar. 1, 2007, no pet. h.) (mem. op, not designated for publication) (collecting cases).  Based on Vanderburg and its progeny, we overrule appellant=s issues and affirm the trial court=s judgment.

/s/      Leslie B. Yates

Justice

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed May 1, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Hudson.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).