D Kendrik Dewayne Moore v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •              In the
    Court of Appeals
    Second Appellate District of Texas
    at Fort Worth
    ___________________________
    No. 02-22-00196-CR
    ___________________________
    D KENDRIK DEWAYNE MOORE, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS
    On Appeal from the 371st District Court
    Tarrant County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 1636632D
    Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J.
    Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    D Kendrik Moore filed a pro se notice of appeal from the trial court’s
    judgment adjudicating him guilty of sexual assault of a child under seventeen years of
    age. See 
    Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.011
    (a)(2). The trial court sentenced him to two
    years’ confinement in accordance with an agreement in which Moore pled true to the
    allegations in the State’s petition to proceed to adjudication in exchange for the State’s
    two-year punishment recommendation. Moore signed written plea admonishments
    that included a waiver of the right of appeal. 1
    The trial court’s certification of Moore’s right to appeal states that this “is a
    plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See Tex. R. App. P.
    25.2(a)(2). Based on the certification, we notified Moore that his appeal would be
    dismissed unless, within ten days, he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed
    a response showing grounds for continuing it. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 44.3.
    More than ten days have passed, and the only response we have received was a slightly
    1
    The written admonishments informed Moore that “[a] motion to revoke your
    community supervision or a petition to proceed to adjudication has been filed in
    which you are charged with a violation of the conditions of your community
    supervision” and that “[t]he punishment agreement is: 2 years TDC.” In that
    document, Moore agreed that he was aware of the consequences of his plea and that
    he “g[a]ve up and waive[d] any and all rights of appeal.” Under a section titled
    “Judicial Confession,” Moore swore that he “enter[ed] [his] plea of true to each and
    every act alleged” in the State’s petition.
    2
    modified version of Moore’s notice of appeal on which he had written some citations
    to authority, none of which have any apparent application to this case.2
    Rule 25.2(a)(2) does not restrict a defendant’s right of appeal when he pleads
    true to one or more allegations in a petition to adjudicate. See Tex. R. App. P.
    25.2(a)(2); Hargesheimer v. State, 
    182 S.W.3d 906
    , 911–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)
    (concluding that a case in which a defendant pleads true to allegations in a motion to
    adjudicate is not a plea-bargain case under rule 25.2(a)(2)); see also Dears v. State,
    
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (“[Rule 25.2(a)(2)] refers only to plea
    bargains with regard to guilty pleas, not pleas of true on revocation motions.”).
    However, Moore’s waiver of his right of appeal is binding because he signed the
    waiver and pled true in exchange for the State’s punishment recommendation, and the
    trial court followed the recommendation. See Blanco v. State, 
    18 S.W.3d 218
    , 219–
    20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); Jackson v. State, 
    168 S.W.3d 239
    , 242–43 (Tex. App.—Fort
    Worth 2005, no pet.). Because Moore waived his right to appeal the trial court’s
    adjudication judgment, we dismiss his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); Jackson,
    
    168 S.W.3d at 243
    ; see also Salazar v. State, No. 02-18-00004-CR, 
    2018 WL 1324487
    , at
    2
    Moore did not explain the significance of the cited authority or why this court
    should continue his appeal, and the cited authority does not address a waiver of the
    right to appeal under the circumstances of this case. See U.S. Const. amend. V, VI,
    XIV; Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. arts. 37.07, 42.12 (repealed by Act of May 26, 2015,
    84th Leg., ch. 770 (H.B. 2299), § 3.01); Koller v. State, 
    518 S.W.2d 373
    , 374 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 1975); Duhart v. State, 
    652 S.W.2d 824
    , 825 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1983), aff’d,
    
    668 S.W.2d 384
     (Tex. Crim. App. 1984).
    3
    *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 15, 2018, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for
    publication).
    Per Curiam
    Do Not Publish
    Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
    Delivered: November 10, 2022
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-22-00196-CR

Filed Date: 11/10/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/14/2022