Christopher Frank Diaz v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued August 15, 2023
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-23-00292-CR
    NO. 01-23-00293-CR
    ———————————
    CHRISTOPHER DIAZ, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 351st District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case Nos. 1705819 & 1695693
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant Christopher Frank Diaz pleaded guilty to the felony offenses of
    assault of a family member.1     The trial court found appellant guilty, and, in
    1
    See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.01.
    accordance with the terms of appellant’s plea bargain agreement with the State,
    sentenced appellant to 14 years in jail for each offense, to run concurrently.
    Appellant filed pro se notices of appeal. We dismiss the appeals.
    In a plea bargain case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were
    raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial
    court’s permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 44.02; TEX. R. APP. P.
    25.2(a)(2).   An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the
    defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX. R.
    APP. P. 25.2(d).
    Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See id.
    The trial court’s certification states that this is a plea bargain case and that the
    defendant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record
    supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 615
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must
    dismiss this appeal. See Chavez v. State, 
    183 S.W.3d 675
    , 680 (Tex. Crim. App.
    2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an
    appellant who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must
    dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the
    appeal.”).
    2
    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss
    any pending motions as moot.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Hightower and Countiss.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-23-00293-CR

Filed Date: 8/15/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/21/2023