Darrell Glen Nervis-Peters v. State

Opinion issued October 18, 2018
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-17-00831-CR
———————————
DARRELL GLEN NERVIS-PETERS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 263rd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1519293
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Darrell Glen Nervis-Peters, pleaded guilty without an agreed
recommendation as to punishment to the offense of aggravated robbery by threat
with a deadly weapon. As part of a plea agreement with the State, the State dismissed
a separate pending aggravated robbery charge against appellant. The trial court
found appellant guilty and sentenced him to thirty years’ imprisonment. The trial
court certified that appellant had waived his right of appeal, but appellant timely
filed a notice of appeal. The State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want
of jurisdiction. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal.
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. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d);
Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The trial court’s
certification is included in the record on appeal and states that appellant waived the
right of appeal. The trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law
demonstrating that appellant agreed to plead guilty and waive his right to appeal in
exchange for the State’s dismissal of a separate charge against appellant. Thus, the
record supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 615.
A valid waiver of appeal—one made voluntarily, knowingly, and
intelligently—prevents a defendant from appealing without the trial court’s consent.
See Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 1.14(a) (“The defendant in a criminal prosecution for any
offense may waive any rights secured him by law . . . .”). “[A] defendant may
knowingly and intelligently waive his entire appeal as a part of a plea, even when
sentencing is not agreed upon, where consideration is given by the State for that
waiver.” Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d at 699; see Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d
2
801, 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (concluding that defendant waived right to appeal
in exchange for State’s abandonment of enhancement pursuant to plea agreement
without agreement as to punishment). Here, the record reflects that the State gave
consideration by dismissing a separate charge against appellant in exchange for
appellant’s guilty plea and waiver of his right to appeal. Because the trial court’s
certification that appellant waived his right of appeal is supported by the record and
the trial court has not given permission to appeal, appellant has no right of appeal.
Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 613.
Accordingly, we grant the State’s motion to dismiss and dismiss this appeal
for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any other pending
motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Brown and Caughey
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
3