Hector Mario Gonzalez v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided October 14, 2015·No. 01-15-00394-CR·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 01-15-00394-CR FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 10/14/2015 9:09:34 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE CLERK

No. 01-15-00394-CR __________________________________________________________________ FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS FOR THE 10/14/2015 9:09:34 PM FIRST SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICTCHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk AT HOUSTON

__________________________________________________________________ HECTOR MARIO GONZAEZ § APPELLANT

V. §

STATE OF TEXAS § APPELLEE

__________________________________________________________________

On appeal in Cause No. 1397723 from the 174TH District Court of Harris County

________________________________________________________________

BRIEF OF APPELLANT

__________________________________________________________________

J. Sidney Crowley 214 Morton St. Richmond, Tx. 77469 (281) 232-8332 TBC No. 05170200

Attorney for Appellant INTERESTED PARTIES

TRIAL JUDGE Honorable Ruben Guerrero 174th District Court

APPELLANT Hector Mario Gonzalez Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Division

TRIAL COUNSEL R. P. Cornelius 2028 Buffalo Terrace Houston, Texas 77019

APPELLATE COUNSEL J. Sidney Crowley 214 Morton St. Richmond, Texas 77469

Devon Anderson District Attorney Harris County

Adam Brodrick Assistant District Attorney Harris County

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF INTERESTED PARTIES............................................................................2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES.......................................................................................4

STATEMENT OF THE CASE....................................................................................5

POINTS OF ERROR.................................................................................................6

STATEMENT OF FACTS..........................................................................................7

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT...................................................................... 10

POINT OF ERROR ONE The trial court reversibly erred when it completely failed to admonish Appellant on the range of punishment prior to accepting his plea of guilty...............................................................................................................11

PRAYER FOR RELIEF.............................................................................................13

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE..........................................................................13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE...................................................................................13

3 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Statutes and Rules

TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC., art.26.13(a)...................................................................11

TEX.R. APP.PROC., Rule 44.2(b).............................................................................11

Cases

Aguirre-Mata v. State, 125 S.W.3d 473 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003)...............................11

4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

Appellant, charged by indictment with the felony offense of aggravated robbery,

entered a plea of guilty to the jury, which assessed his punishment at confinement for

30 years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Division.

5 POINTS OF ERROR

POINT OF ERROR ONE

The trial court reversibly erred when it completely failed to admonish Appellant

on the range of punishment prior to accepting his plea of guilty.

6 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Appellant was charged by indictment with the aggravated robbery of Eloy

Canales. After being arraigned, Appellant entered a plea of guilty before the jury.

Eloy Canales testified that on August 11, 2013, he was at a car wash in

Pasadena cleaning some containers (RR-4, p. 11). A truck drove to the bay where he

was located and a young man, identified as Appellant, got out carrying a rifle (RR-4,

p. 17). Appellant held the rifle to his chest and and told him not to turn around.

Appellant took his wallet, which contained $50, and cell phone and threw the keys to

Canales’ truck into the street. Canales then went home and called the police (RR-4, p.

50).

Andrew Rohm, a Pasadena police officer, testified that he was dispatched to the

car wash in reference to a robbery and met with Canales (RR-4, p. 28). He obtained

a description of a blue Dodge truck driven by a Hispanic male and broadcast it over

the police radio channel. After learning that a suspect had been apprehended, he

transported Canales to a Denny’s restaurant to identify the robber (RR-4, p. 36).

Enrique Castillo testified that on the same day he was in the parking lot of a

Foodtown grocery store on Richey Rd. He was in his vehicle talking with a young

woman who was in a separate car. A blue truck pulled up and blocked him in. A man,

whom he identified as Appellant, exited the truck with a shotgun and cocked it (RR-4,

7 p. 47). Appellant demanded his wallet and cellphone. As Appellant drove away

Castillo was able to record the license number of the truck (RR-4, p. 53).

Laurence Garza testified that he and his wife were grocery shopping at the Mi

Tienda store on Spencer Highway. He had left the store and was walking to his truck

As he began opening the driver’s side door Appellant racked a long gun and placed

it to his head (RR-4, p. 56), demanding his wallet and cellphone. When Gonzo’s wife

approached Appellant demanded her purse. Appellant took the items and drove away

in a blue Dodge truck (RR-4, p.59).

Feliz Garza. Laurence’s wife, testified that as she was walking to her truck with

bags of groceries she saw someone holding a long object that resembled a cane. Her

husband told her to give the man her purse, which she did. They then called police

(RR-4, p. 79).

Pasadena police officer Jason Mitchell testified that he was on patrol when he

received the description of the robber’s truck. He began searching for it and located

it within ten minutes (RR-4, p.89). He pulled in behind the truck and followed it,

activating his emergency lights. Appellant began to flee and Mitchell chased him for

several miles. Appellant lost control of the truck and crashed into a house. He was

taken into custody and a shotgun, several wallets, cellphones and a purse were

recovered (RR-4, p. 108).

8 Olga Rubalcava testified that on August 2, 2013, she had gone to a Fiesta store

with her sister and daughter to buy fish (RR-5, p.5). As she was opening her car door

a blue truck pulled up and blocked them in. Appellant exited the truck holding a rifle

and asked for her purse. He took the purse and a cellphone and left (RR-5, p.12).

Appellant testified on his own behalf. He described his life growing up and

numerous hardships he had encountered. He also testified that he had begun using

drugs after beginning a relationship with a woman. He was in need of money when he

committed the robberies with which he was charged.

9 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

The record is devoid of any indication that Appellant was admonished on the

range of punishment prior to entering his plea of guilty.

.

10 POINT OF ERROR ONE

The trial court reversibly erred when it completely failed to admonish Appellant

on the range of punishment prior to accepting his plea of guilty.

Argument and Authorities

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hector Mario Gonzalez v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Hector Mario Gonzalez v. State (Hector Mario Gonzalez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Aguirre-Mata v. State
125 S.W.3d 473 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2003)