Court of Criminal Appeals found the plea was not independent of the pretrial ruling. Similarly, there is no indication Hargrove’s plea was conditional. While the better practice may be to create a record showing the decision to plead was not independent of the pretrial ruling, the Court of Criminal Appeals seems to have left to the courts to assess the issue on a case-by-case basis. With guilty pleas, we cannot analyze the pretrial ruling in the context of the entire factual circumstances to determine whether it formed part of the basis for deciding to plead guilty. Accordingly, we must rely upon the record at the pretrial hearing and look to the nature of the issue upon which the trial court ruled. Hargrove v. State, 40 S.W.3d 556, 558 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). 3 . For example, appellant argues, "Moreover,
holding that appellants waived any claim of error as to the portion of the lower courts ruling that they did not expressly challenge on appeal holding challenge to suppression ruling not waived under young even though record did not affirmatively indicate that the ruling was part or all of reason for plea holding that on appeal a summary judgment ruling will be upheld if it can be sustained on any grounds even if the trial court gave an incorrect reason for its ruling holding that appellate court reviewing trial courts habeas corpus ruling must review record evidence in light most favorable to ruling and uphold ruling absent abuse of discretion holding that the defendant waived the right to challenge a suppression ruling on appeal