Opinion issued July 31, 2018 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00438-CR ——————————— VITH LOCH, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 209th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1463146 MEMORANDUM OPINION After appellant, Vith Loch, without an agreed punishment recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the offense of murder,1 a jury found him guilty of murder and assessed his punishment at confinement for life and a $10,000.00 fine. 1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 19.02(b)(1) (Vernon 2011). In three issues, appellant contends that the trial court erred in not admonishing him of the potential immigration consequences of his guilty plea, the trial court erred in not making certain findings before accepting his guilty plea,2 and, as a result, he entered his guilty plea involuntarily. In its sole cross-point, the State requests reformation of clerical errors in the judgment. We reverse and remand. Background At his arraignment, the trial court advised appellant as to the range of punishment for the offense of murder, but it did not provide any further admonitions. Appellant testified that he discussed his case at length with his trial counsel, including all potential defensive theories and strategies. However, despite his trial counsel’s presentation of various possible defensive strategies, appellant chose to plead guilty to committing the 2004 murder of Soeuth Nay, the “complainant,” and for a jury to assess his punishment. During the trial on the issue of punishment, Tavey Mao, the complainant’s cousin, testified that he saw appellant threaten the complainant with a firearm near the time of his murder. N.M. testified that she thought highly of the complainant and that her family had hoped she would marry him when she was older. However, she feared 2 See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 26.13 (Vernon Supp. 2017). 2 appellant, explaining that when she was twelve years old, he kissed her against her will while she babysat his son. And after the complainant’s disappearance in 2004, when N.M. was fourteen years old, appellant called to tell her that the complainant “was gone.” Shortly thereafter, N.M. ran into appellant. He offered to buy her a soft drink, and she got into his car because she was afraid to refuse his offer. Appellant then drove her to a motel where he sexually assaulted her. N.H., appellant’s former “girlfriend” and the mother of two of his children, testified that they began a “relationship” when she was fifteen years old and he was much older. During their on-and-off relationship, which lasted for six or seven years, he was violent towards her and would point a firearm at her when he was angry. Appellant even fired a shot at her one time while she was pregnant. In 2004, on the night of the complainant’s murder, appellant insisted that N.H. go to work even though she was not scheduled to do so. Later that evening, when she telephoned him after her shift for a ride ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals