Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

692 S.W.2d 598

Smith v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 3, 1985

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 1985-07-03

Relies on Helms v. State · King v. State

Decided 1985-07-03

¶1OPINION

ASHWORTH, Justice.

¶2Appellant entered a plea of guilty before the jury to the offense of murder. TEX. PENAL CODE sec. 19.02(a)[l] (Vernon Supp.1985). The jury assessed punishment at confinement for 95 years in the Texas Department of Corrections.

¶3In a sole ground of error on appeal, appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Because we find error, if any, has been waived by appellant’s plea of guilty, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

¶4In King v. State, 687 S.W.2d 762 (Tex.Crim.App.1985) (not yet reported), the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the viability of the so-called Helms rule and its applicability to guilty pleas before a jury. See also Harrelson v. State, — S.W.2d *599- No. 494-84 and 495-84 (Tex.Crim.App., May 8, 1985) (not yet reported). In Helms v. State, 484 S.W.2d 925 (Tex.Crim.App.1972), the Court held that a guilty plea, knowingly and voluntarily made, waives all nonjurisdictional defects including claimed deprivation of federal due process. Id. at 927.

¶5In the case at bar, appellant entered a guilty plea before the jury after proper and careful admonishment from the court. The plea, being voluntarily and understandably made, waived all non-jurisdictional defects. See King v. State, supra. Appellant thus waived any right to appeal the ruling on the motion to suppress.

¶6The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

/692/sw2d/598 · .json · Public domain