Daniel Ray Bruno v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 22, 2003
• Docket: 09-02-00481-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-02-481 CR

DANIEL RAY BRUNO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 84783

MEMORANDUM OPINION ⁽¹⁾

Daniel Ray Bruno pleaded guilty to the third degree felony offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 46.04 (a)(1),(e) (Vernon 2003). Following a plea bargain agreement between Bruno and the State that set an upper limit on the range of punishment, the trial court sentenced Bruno to six years of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. Appellate counsel filed a brief that concludes no arguable error is presented in this appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On June 26, 2003, Bruno was given an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant.

The "Agreed Punishment Recommendation," which limited the upper range of punishment to 6 years, established the existence of a plea bargain agreement as to the punishment to be assessed by the trial court. See Delatorre v. State, 957 S.W.2d 145 (Tex. App.-Austin 1997, pet. ref'd). The trial court sentenced the appellant within the terms of the plea bargain agreement. Therefore, the procedures for plea-bargained felony cases apply to this appeal. Because the appeal was perfected before January 1, 2003, the notice of appeal must specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3) (1997, amended 2003). The general notice of appeal filed by Bruno failed to invoke our appellate jurisdiction. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428-29 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).

We have reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Bruno raises no points of error over which we have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on October 15, 2003

Opinion Delivered October 22, 2003

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.

1. Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.