William Edward Hernandez v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued May 5, 2015
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-13-00771-CR
    ———————————
    WILLIAM EDWARD HERNANDEZ, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 177th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 1265866
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Pursuant to an agreement with the State that punishment be capped at
    confinement for thirty years, appellant, William Edward Hernandez, pleaded guilty
    to the felony offense of murder.1 The trial court accepted the plea agreement and,
    in accordance with the agreement with the State, assessed appellant’s punishment
    at confinement for twenty-six years. The trial court certified that this is a
    plea-bargained case and appellant has no right of appeal. Appellant filed a pro se
    notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal.
    In a plea-bargained case, a defendant may appeal only those matters that
    were raised by written motion and ruled on before trial or after obtaining 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 a right of appeal has not been made part of the
    record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
    The clerk’s record reflects that appellant pleaded guilty in exchange for the
    State’s recommendation that punishment be capped at confinement for thirty
    years.2 An agreement to a recommended cap on punishment constitutes a plea
    bargain. See Shankle v. State, 
    119 S.W.3d 808
    , 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003);
    1
    See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 19.02 (West 2011).
    2
    The trial court’s judgment states, “Term of Plea Bargain: Without a
    Recommendation.” Such language does not convert the plea to an open plea when,
    as here, the plea was entered pursuant to an agreed sentencing cap. See Threadgill
    v. State, 120 SW.3d 871, 872 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.)
    (holding statement in record indicating there was no agreed recommendation did
    not convert proceeding into open plea when plea was entered pursuant to agreed
    sentencing cap).
    
    2 Wilson v
    . State, 
    264 S.W.3d 104
    , 108 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no
    pet.); Waters v. State, 
    124 S.W.3d 825
    , 826 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.]
    2003, pet. ref’d). Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record and
    states that this is a plea-bargained case and appellant has no right of appeal. See
    TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). We conclude that the record supports the trial court’s
    certification. See Dears v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
    The trial court did not rule adversely to appellant on any pre-trial matters
    and did not give appellant permission to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).
    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 all
    pending motions as moot.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Lloyd.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    3