Lucio Antonio Celis v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )

Dismiss and Opinion Filed May 5, 2022
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-22-00391-CR
LUCIO ANTONIO CELIS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F20-36717-N
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Garcia
Opinion by Justice Molberg
We reinstate this appeal. When Lucio Antonio Celis filed a timely pro se
notice of appeal seeking to challenge his conviction for murder, we abated for the
appointment of counsel. Several days later, the trial court filed a letter, informing us
he had not appointed counsel because appellant “entered into a plea-bargain and
waived his right to appeal.” The trial court attached documents supporting this
statement. The following day, the clerk’s record was filed. After considering the trial
court’s response and the clerk’s record, we dismiss this appeal.
Appellant, who was represented by counsel, was indicted for capital murder.
He entered into a negotiated plea bargain with the State in which he agreed to
judicially confess to murder and plead guilty in exchange for the State’s agreement
to strike certain language from the indictment (reducing the charge from capital
murder to murder) and recommend punishment at thirty-five years in prison. As
further consideration for the plea bargain, appellant waived his right to appeal. See
Blanco v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 219–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). Following the plea
agreement, the trial court struck the phrase “and the defendant was then and there in
the course of committing and attempting to commit the offense of ROBBERY of
said deceased” from the indictment, reduced the offense from capital murder to
murder, found appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at thirty-five years in
prison. The trial court prepared and signed a rule 25.2(d) certification of appellant’s
right to appeal stating this “is a plea-bargain case, and [appellant] has NO right to
appeal” and appellant “has waived the right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
The certification is supported by the documents before the Court. See Dears v. State,
154 S.W.3d 610, 614–15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Because appellant waived his right to appeal in conjunction with the plea
agreement, we conclude we lack jurisdiction See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a), (d);
Lundgren v. State, 434 S.W.3d 594, 599 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (when appellant
voluntarily waives right of appeal to secure benefits of plea bargain agreement,
subsequent notice of appeal fails to “initiate the appellate process”).
–2–
We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
/Ken Molberg//
KEN MOLBERG
JUSTICE
220391f.u05
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
–3–
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
LUCIO ANTONIO CELIS, On Appeal from the 195th Judicial
Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F20-36717-N.
No. 05-22-00391-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice
Molberg. Justices Reichek and
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Garcia participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.
Judgment entered this 5th day of May, 2022.
–4–