Eligio Manolo Lopez v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

Appeal dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 16, 2024.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-24-00140-CR
ELIGIO MANOLO LOPEZ, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 184th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1752311
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of aggravated sexual
assault of a child under fourteen years of age. Appellant and the State agreed that
appellant’s punishment would not exceed confinement in prison for more than
thirty-five years and that the State would dismiss a related criminal proceeding in
cause number 1800466. In accordance with the terms of this plea-bargain agreement
with the State, the trial court assessed appellant to confinement for twenty years and
a $100.00 fine. We dismiss the appeal.
The trial court entered a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in
which the court certified that this is a plea-bargain case and the defendant has no
right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). An agreement that places a cap on
punishment is a plea bargain for purposes of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure
25.2(a)(2). Shankle v. State, 119 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Waters
v. State, 124 S.W.3d 825, 826–27 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. ref’d)
(holding reviewing court lacked jurisdiction when defendant pleaded guilty with
sentencing cap of ten years, even though trial judge mistakenly certified defendant
had right of appeal); Threadgill v. State, 120 S.W.3d 871, 872 (Tex. App.—Houston
[1st Dist.] 2003, no. pet.) (holding statement in record indicating there was no agreed
recommendation did not convert proceeding into open plea when plea was entered
pursuant to agreed sentencing cap).
Because appellant’s plea was made pursuant to a plea bargain, he may appeal
only matters raised by a written pretrial motion or with the trial court’s permission.
See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record does not contain any pretrial rulings, and
the record does not reflect that the trial court has given permission to appeal any
matter.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Spain and Poissant.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2