Sara Peuttus v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                             NUMBER 13-22-00119-CR
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
    SARA PEUTTUS,                                                                Appellant,
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                           Appellee.
    On appeal from the 156th District Court
    of Bee County, Texas.
    ORDER
    Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina
    Order Per Curiam
    Appellant, Sara Peuttus, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from her
    conviction in trial court cause number B-21-2128-0-CR-B. 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).
    Within thirty days of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel, Travis Berry,
    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 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
    2
    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
    24th day of March, 2022.
    3