Christopher Ray Weatherspoon v. State
03-15-00237-CR
| Tex. App. | Jul 15, 2016Background
- Christopher Ray Weatherspoon was indicted on two counts of state-jail felony theft and signed a Written Plea Agreement that included a Judicial Confession admitting he committed each act alleged in the indictment.
- The Judicial Confession stated he had read the indictment, that the allegations were true, and that he was guilty of the offense and lesser-included offenses; the plea papers included counsel and prosecutor acknowledgments and the court’s approval.
- At the guilt/innocence hearing the State asked the court to take judicial notice of the file (including the plea papers and stipulation of evidence); defense counsel had no objection and the court accepted the guilty plea.
- After a punishment hearing the court sentenced Weatherspoon to two years’ imprisonment and entered judgment of conviction.
- On appeal Weatherspoon argued (1) the evidence was insufficient under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 1.15 to support conviction on his guilty plea because the confession was not sworn before a clerk, (2) alternatively the sentencing evidence was insufficient, and (3) the written judgment should be corrected to reflect no plea bargain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Weatherspoon) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether judicial confession/stipulation in plea papers satisfied art. 1.15 sufficiency requirement | The written judicial confession and stipulation to indictment allegations alone embrace every element and suffice to support conviction on a guilty plea | The confession was incompetent because it lacked a jurat or oath before the clerk and thus could not supply the requisite evidence | Held: confession properly before the court by judicial notice and sufficient to support conviction under art. 1.15 |
| Whether evidence at sentencing could or did supply art. 1.15 requirements (alternative argument) | If needed, State could point to other evidence presented at sentencing to support conviction | Weatherspoon argued sentencing evidence was insufficient to establish guilt | Not reached on merits — court decided confession alone sufficed, so alternative issue unnecessary |
| Whether judgment should state there was a plea bargain | State conceded judgment wording could be misread and agreed to correction if ambiguous | Weatherspoon argued the judgment incorrectly suggested a plea bargain | Held: sustain — judgment modified to remove reference implying a plea bargain; as modified, conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Chindaphone v. State, 241 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007) (judicial confession that admits each alleged act can alone satisfy art. 1.15)
- Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (opinion on rehearing) (judicial confession principle supports convictions on guilty pleas)
- Ybarra v. State, 93 S.W.3d 922 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002) (judicial confession validity and admissibility not defeated by lack of clerk jurat)
- Wright v. State, 930 S.W.2d 131 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1996) (conviction on guilty plea proper where defendant’s confession or stipulation admits the indictment’s allegations)
- Watson v. State, 974 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998) (judicial confession sufficient to sustain conviction where defendant affirms indictment allegations are true)