Harris v. State
Opinions
OPINION
The offense is possession of heroin; the punishment, upon a plea of guilty before a jury, eighteen (18) years.
Appellant’s first ground of error is that she was not properly admonished before the court accepted her plea of guilty.
At the outset, appellant plead not guilty. During the course of the trial she changed her plea to that of guilty.
In the absence of the jury the court admonished appellant as to the range of punishment. He inquired whether her plea was “voluntary” and whether she had adequately discussed her case with her attorney. However, there is an entire absence of any admonishment concerning force or fear, or promise or persuasion. Inquiry concerning these considerations is requisite for minimum compliance with Article 26.13, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. See Heathcock v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 494 S.W.2d 570, Martinez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 494 S.W. 2d 545. Cf. Espinosa v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 493 S.W.2d 172, and Mitchell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 493 S.W.2d 174.
For the error stated, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
500 S.W.2d 126 (Harris v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.