James Anibal Romero v. State ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued August 23, 2016
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-16-00354-CR
    ———————————
    JAMES ANIBAL ROMERO, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 230th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 1442777
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant, James Anibal Romero, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of
    aggravated sexual assault of a child.1 The trial court found appellant guilty and, in
    1
    See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021(a) (West 2011).
    accordance with the terms of appellant’s plea bargain agreement with the State,
    sentenced appellant to 30 years in prison. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.
    We dismiss the appeal.
    In a plea bargain case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were
    raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial court’s
    permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2006); TEX. R.
    APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the
    defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP.
    P. 25.2(d).
    Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See 
    id. The trial
    court’s certification states that this is a plea bargain case and that the
    defendant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record supports
    the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 615 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal.
    See Chavez v. State, 
    183 S.W.3d 675
    , 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of
    appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant who
    plea- bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited
    appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”).
    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss any
    pending motions as moot.
    2
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Huddle.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-16-00354-CR

Filed Date: 8/23/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/23/2016