Joe Guidry v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                             NUMBER 13-15-00543-CR
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
    JOE GUIDRY,                                                                  Appellant
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                           Appellee.
    On appeal from the 94th District Court
    of Nueces County, Texas.
    ORDER
    Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Longoria
    Order Per Curiam
    Appellant, Joe Guidry, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his
    conviction in trial court cause number 14-CR-3274-C(S1). The trial court’s certification
    of the defendant’s right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to
    appeal.   See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
    provide that an appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that a defendant has
    a right of appeal is not made a part of the record. Id. R. 25.2(d); see id. R. 37.1, 44.3,
    44.4. The purpose of the certification requirement is to efficiently sort appealable cases
    from non-appealable cases so that appealable cases can “move through the system
    unhindered while eliminating, at an early stage, the time and expense associated with
    non-appealable cases.” Greenwell v. Ct. of Apps. for the Thirteenth Jud. Dist., 
    159 S.W.3d 645
    , 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see Hargesheimer v. State, 
    182 S.W.3d 906
    ,
    912 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
    The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that a trial counsel’s duties do not
    end upon sentencing, but rather, include advising a client concerning the right to appeal
    and “taking other steps to pursue an appeal.” See Jones v. State, 
    98 S.W.3d 700
    , 703
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
    Within thirty days of date of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel,
    George Picha III, is hereby ORDERED to: 1) review the record; 2) determine whether
    appellant has a right to appeal; and 3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings
    as to whether appellant has a right to appeal and/or advise this Court as to the
    existence of any amended certification. If appellant’s counsel determines that appellant
    has a right to appeal, counsel is further ORDERED to file a motion with this Court within
    thirty days of this notice, identifying and explaining substantive reasons why appellant
    has a right to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4; Dears v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    ,
    614–15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also, e.g., Carroll v. State, 
    119 S.W.3d 838
    , 841
    (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.) (certification form provided in appendix to
    appellate rules may be modified to reflect that defendant has right of appeal under
    circumstances not addressed by the form). The motion must include an analysis of the
    applicable case law, and any factual allegations therein must be true and supported by
    the record. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614–15; cf. Woods v. State, 
    108 S.W.3d 314
    ,
    316 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (construing former appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) and holding that
    2
    recitations in the notice of appeal must be true and supported by the record). Copies of
    record documents necessary to evaluate the alleged error in the certification affecting
    appellant’s right to appeal shall be attached to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1,
    10.2.
    PER CURIAM
    Do not publish.
    TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    Delivered and filed the
    18th day of November, 2015.
    3