Juan Ramon Hernandez v. State ( 2014 )

AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed May 13, 2014.
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-12-01488-CR
No. 05-12-01489-CR
JUAN RAMON HERNANDEZ, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F-1219054-H and F-1219055-H
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Lang-Miers, Myers, and Lewis
Opinion by Justice Lewis
Appellant Juan Ramon Hernandez pleaded guilty to intoxication assault and intoxication
manslaughter. The jury assessed his punishment at ten years’ imprisonment for the intoxication
assault conviction, fifteen years’ imprisonment for the intoxication manslaughter conviction, and
a fine of $10,000 for each offense. In a single issue, appellant contends his guilty pleas were
rendered involuntary because he was not properly admonished of the immigration consequences
of those pleas. We affirm the trial court’s judgments.
The record must affirmatively demonstrate that a defendant who pleaded guilty did so
voluntarily. Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242 (1969). We determine the voluntariness of a
plea of guilty from the totality of the circumstances viewed in light of the entire record. Ducker
v. State, 45 S.W.3d 791, 796 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2001, no pet.). Article 26.13 of the Texas Code
of Criminal Procedure requires the trial court to give a defendant certain admonishments before
accepting his guilty plea. Among those required admonishments is this warning concerning the
immigration consequences of pleading guilty:
if the defendant is not a citizen of the United States of America, a plea of guilty or
nolo contendere for the offense charged may result in deportation, the exclusion
from admission to this country, or the denial of naturalization under federal law.
TEX. CRIM. PROC. CODE ANN. art. 26.13(a)(4) (West Supp. 2013). A failure to give this
admonishment may result in reversible error. See VanNortrick v. State, 227 S.W.3d 706, 714
(Tex. Crim. App. 2007).
When appellant’s brief was filed, the record did not indicate the trial court had orally
admonished him before accepting his pleas of guilty. However, the court reporter has since
determined that the pre-trial proceedings in these cases were inadvertently omitted from her
transcription. The reporter has filed a supplemental record of the pre-trial proceedings, which
includes the following exchange concerning the intoxication assault charge:
The Court: I have to also warn you that if you’re not a US citizen your plea of
guilty to the charge, and the other one as well, could and in all likelihood would
result in your deportation, exclusion from admission or denial of naturalization
under federal law.
Do you understand that?
The Defendant: Can you repeat that, please?
The Court: Your plea of guilty to this Indictment and the other one as well, if
that’s how you want to plead, if you’re not a US citizen, your plea of guilty could
and in all likelihood would result in your deportation, exclusion from admission
or denial of naturalization under federal law.
Do you understand that?
The Defendant: Yes.
The Court: Okay. Knowing all these things that I warned you about, do you still
persist in pleading guilty?
The Defendant: Yes.
–2–
The supplemental record also includes the following exchange concerning appellant’s
intoxication manslaughter charge:
The Court: Again, Mr. Hernandez, those same warnings apply. If you persist in
proceeding guilty, I’ll instruct the jury to find you guilty. They’ll be required to
set the punishment in that range of punishment. And if you’re not a US citizen
your plea of guilty in all likelihood would result in your deportation, exclusion
from admission, and denial of naturalization under federal law.
So do you understand all that?
The Defendant: Yes.
We conclude the trial court properly admonished appellant as to the immigration
consequences of both of his pleas. Accordingly, we conclude his guilty pleas were given
voluntarily, and we overrule appellant’s single issue.
We affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/David Lewis/
DAVID LEWIS
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
121488F.U05
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
JUAN RAMON HERNANDEZ, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
No. 1, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-12-01488-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F-1219054-H.
Opinion delivered by Justice Lewis.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Lang-Miers and Myers
participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered this 13th day of May, 2014.
/David Lewis/
DAVID LEWIS
JUSTICE
–4–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
JUAN RAMON HERNANDEZ, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
No. 1, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-12-01489-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F-1219055-H.
Opinion delivered by Justice Lewis.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Lang-Miers and Myers
participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered this 13th day of May, 2014.
/David Lewis/
DAVID LEWIS
JUSTICE
–5–