Debra Anthony v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •              In the
    Court of Appeals
    Second Appellate District of Texas
    at Fort Worth
    ___________________________
    No. 02-23-00023-CR
    ___________________________
    DEBRA ANTHONY, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS
    On Appeal from the 396th District Court
    Tarrant County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 1721864D
    Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant Debra Anthony attempts to appeal her conviction for driving while
    intoxicated and felony repetition. See 
    Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.09
    . Anthony
    pleaded guilty to that offense pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, and the trial court
    sentenced her in accordance with that agreement to eight years’ confinement and an
    $1,100 fine, with the confinement suspended and Anthony placed on community
    supervision for five years. Under the written plea admonishments that were signed by
    Anthony, Anthony waived her right to appeal. Specifically, through those written plea
    admonishments, Anthony stated, “I give up and waive any and all rights of appeal in
    this case.” Anthony also stated, “I give up and waive all pretrial motions that may
    have been filed in my case.” Consistent with Anthony’s plea-bargain agreement, the
    “Trial Court’s [Amended] Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal” in this case
    reflects that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.”1
    See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).
    On February 23, 2023, we notified Anthony of the amended certification and
    warned her that we would dismiss the appeal unless we received a response by
    1
    The trial court initially signed a certification in which boxes were marked to
    indicate that (1) this “is a plea-bargain case, but matters were raised by written motion
    filed and ruled on before trial and not withdrawn or waived, and the defendant has
    the right of appeal”; and (2) this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO
    right of appeal.” The trial court later amended that certification, scratching out the
    box that had been marked to indicate that this “is a plea-bargain case, but matters
    were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial and not withdrawn or
    waived, and the defendant has the right of appeal.”
    2
    March 6, 2023, showing grounds for continuing the appeal.               See Tex. R. App.
    P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 44.3. While Anthony filed a response, it does not show grounds for
    continuing the appeal.2 In accordance with the trial court’s amended certification, we
    dismiss Anthony’s appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f); see, e.g., Hubatch v. State,
    No. 02-22-00153-CR, 
    2022 WL 4105417
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 8, 2022,
    no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
    /s/ Dana Womack
    Dana Womack
    Justice
    Do Not Publish
    Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
    Delivered: June 22, 2023
    2
    In her response, Anthony claims that she intended to retain “the right to
    appeal matters that were raised in written form and ruled on by the trial court prior to
    the plea” and that taking away her right to appeal would render her plea involuntary.
    We disagree. As noted above, in the written plea admonishments, Anthony
    specifically stated that she was giving up and waiving “all rights of appeal in this case”
    and “all pretrial motions that may have been filed in [her] case.” And there is nothing
    in the record—no reporter’s record was made of Anthony’s plea—to indicate that
    those written waivers were not made voluntarily. See Monreal v. State, 
    99 S.W.3d 615
    ,
    622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (holding that a valid waiver of appeal will prevent a
    defendant from appealing without the trial court’s consent); Connella v. State, No. 2-06-
    360-CR, 
    2006 WL 3751406
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 21, 2006, no pet.)
    (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (rejecting appellant’s
    argument that he should be able to appeal matters raised by pretrial motions and ruled
    upon prior to trial where he signed a written waiver in which he “not only waived his
    right to appeal but also gave up and waived all pretrial motions that may have been
    filed in connection with his case”).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-23-00023-CR

Filed Date: 6/22/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/26/2023