Larry Louis Brim v. State, 02-16-00053-CR

Victim (K.K.), 17, reported years of sexual abuse by stepfather Larry Brim beginning as young as age 8; Brim admitted some conduct during police interview.
Brim was indicted on one count of continuous sexual abuse and seven counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child under 14; he signed a judicial confession and entered an open plea to one count of aggravated sexual assault in exchange for dismissal of the other counts.
Brim executed written plea admonishments and a waiver stating his plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered; he requested a presentence investigation (PSI).
At sentencing the court reviewed the PSI, heard arguments (defense sought leniency; State sought 25 years), and sentenced Brim to 25 years’ confinement.
Brim moved for new trial (raising no voluntariness or ineffective-assistance grounds), then appealed claiming his plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel; the appellate record contained no hearing transcript or corroboration of Brim’s post-sentencing affidavit alleging counsel advised the plea out of lack of confidence.

Issue	Brim's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether Brim’s guilty plea was involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel	Counsel was unprepared and told Brim he could not win, pressuring an open guilty plea; thus plea was not knowing/voluntary	Written admonishments and plea documents, and the record, show the plea was voluntary; Brim’s after‑the‑fact affidavit is uncorroborated	Court held Brim failed to rebut the prima-facie voluntariness of his plea and did not overcome the strong presumption counsel was effective; issue overruled

Martinez v. State, 981 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (proper admonishments create a prima-facie showing of plea voluntariness)
Ex parte Moody, 991 S.W.2d 856 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (two‑part test for ineffective assistance affecting voluntariness of plea)
Nava v. State, 415 S.W.3d 289 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (strong presumption that counsel’s performance is effective)
Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (ineffective-assistance claims must be firmly founded in the record)
Fimberg v. State, 922 S.W.2d 205 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1996) (appellant’s uncorroborated post‑plea assertions are insufficient)
Scott v. State, 86 S.W.3d 374 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002) (appellate review may rely on clerk’s record to assess voluntariness)
McDougal v. State, 105 S.W.3d 119 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003) (defendant cannot rely on absence of a record when he waived making one)
Ex parte Dunham, 650 S.W.2d 825 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (distinguished; evidentiary hearing present in that case)