Juan Ignacio Reyes v. State ( 2012 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-12-00334-CR
Juan Ignacio REYES,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2012CR3818W
Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: August 1, 2012
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Juan Ignacio Reyes pled nolo contendere
to the offense of theft under $1,500.00. As part of his plea-bargain, appellant signed a separate
“Waiver of Appeal.” The trial court imposed sentence and signed a certificate stating that this
“is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and “the defendant has waived
the right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After appellant timely filed a notice of
appeal, the clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See TEX. R.
04-12-00334-CR
APP. P. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial
court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the
punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant and that the trial
court denied permission to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After reviewing the clerk’s
record, the trial court’s certification therefore appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea
bargain case and appellant does not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610
(Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to determine
whether trial court’s certification is accurate). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a
certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the
record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
On June 15, 2012, we gave appellant notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless
written consent to appeal and an amended certification showing appellant has the right to appeal
were signed by the trial judge and made part of the appellate record by July 16, 2012. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003,
order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not
designated for publication). Neither written permission to appeal nor an amended certification
showing appellant has the right to appeal has been filed. We therefore dismiss this appeal. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-