Cedrick Okeith Young v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 19, 1995
• Docket: 10-94-00111-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Young-CO v. State

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-94-111-CR

     CEDRICK OKEITH YOUNG,

                                                                                              Appellant

     v.

     THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                                              Appellee

From the 292nd District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court # F93-69211-V

O P I N I O N

      Appellant was charged by indictment with unlawful possession of cocaine in an aggregate amount of less than 28 grams and, in addition, it contained two enhancement paragraphs alleging prior felony convictions.

        Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Appellant waived a jury, pled guilty to the charged offense, and pled "true" to the second and third paragraphs of the indictment.

      The trial court fully followed the plea-bargain agreement, accepted Appellant's guilty plea, found Appellant guilty, found both enhancement paragraphs to be true, and sentenced Appellant to twenty-five years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.

      Appellant filed a general notice of appeal, and comes to this court on one point of error, asserting that he has been denied the effective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.

      This case falls squarely under Rule 40(b)1), Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Sufficiency and ineffective assistance of counsel claims are not jurisdictional issues; therefore we have no jurisdiction to address these issues. Lyon v. State, 872 S.W.2d 732, 736 (Tex. Crim App. 1994), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 2684, 129 L.Ed.2d 816 (1994). For applicability of Rule 40(b)(1) see Davis v. State, 870 S.W.2d 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994); Shepherd v. State, 884 S.W.2d 571 (Tex. App.—Waco 1994, no pet.); Penney v. State, 880 S.W.2d 59, 61 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994, no pet.).

      We accordingly dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                                                               JOHN A. JAMES, JR.

                                                                               Justice (Retired)

Before Chief Justice Thomas,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice James (Retired)

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed December 19, 1995

Do not publish