against him would be dismissed if he plead guilty. In effect, the State submits, appellant is es-topped from claiming any erroneous advice from defense counsel motivated him to enter a guilty plea. We find merit in the State’s argument. In Curry v. State, the appellant complained that his guilty plea was involuntary because his counsel gave him erroneous advice concerning the amount of time he would have to serve. Curry v. State, 861 S.W.2d 479, 483 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1993, pet. refd). The Court noted that because the appellant indicated at the plea hearing he was changing his plea to guilty because the allegations in the indictment were true, he had a heavy burden to prove otherwise. Id.; see also Sawyer v. State, 778 S.W.2d 641, 543 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1989, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). At the hearing on his guilty plea, the
holding when defendant attests at original plea hearing to voluntary nature of plea heavy burden is placed on him at later hearing to show lack of voluntariness holding that a codefendants prior statements made at his guilty plea hearing were not admissible to corroborate his trial testimony because the witnesss guilty plea hearing did not predate any improper motive he may have had to testify against the defendant holding that defendants failure to appeal the voluntariness of a plea constitutes waiver of the issue on subsequent appeal holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing holding that a counsels oral statements at a plea hearing  that the plea being entered was conditional  did not satisfy the rule 11 writing requirement