Charles Allen Martin, Jr. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
• Decided: June 24, 2026
• Docket: 04-26-00341-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-26-00341-CR

Charles Allen MARTIN, Jr., Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2024-CR-6215 Honorable Benjamin Robertson, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 24, 2026

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Charles Allen Martin Jr. pled nolo contendere to

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and was sentenced to twenty years in prison in

accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On March 25, 2026, the trial court signed

a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the

defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Martin filed a notice of

appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See 04-26-00341-CR

id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has

been filed. See id. 25.2(d).

“In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised

by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to

appeal, or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The

clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes that the punishment assessed by

the trial court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by

Martin. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before

trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id. Thus, the trial

court’s certification appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Martin

does not have the right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the

defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d).

We informed Martin that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that he had the

right to appeal was made part of the appellate record. See id. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial court certification has

been filed. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-