In Bell v. State, 814 S.W.2d 229, 230 (Tex. App.--Houston 1st Dist. 1991, pet. ref'd), appellant moved to quash the enhancement paragraphs of his indictment because, at the time of the prior convictions, he had previously been found incompetent and there had been no judicial determination of his competence after he returned from the hospital. The court reviewed the prior convictions and found that the judgments in two of the cases contained a recital of competence. Id. at 233. The court concluded that the State could properly use the two convictions for enhancement because the use of the word "competent" in the judgment was sufficient to show that Bell had regained competency. Id. Four of the convictions could not be used against appellant because the judgments did not contain a recitation showing his competency had been restored. Bell, 814 S.W.2d at 233.