David Lee Rickerson v. State
Opinion
Order entered October 9, 2019
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00990-CR
DAVID LEE RICKERSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F18-76037-M
ORDER Appellant has filed a September 5, 2019 motion for the Court to determine whether it has
jurisdiction over the appeal. The State has filed a response and appellant has filed a reply
addressing the State’s response.
In his motion, appellant reports he was originally charged with capital murder. A plea
agreement was signed showing appellant agreed to plead guilty to murder on an open plea to the
jury. Appellant was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
The trial court initially prepared a certification of the right to appeal showing there was
no plea bargain and appellant had a right to appeal. Appellant filed his notice of appeal and
appellate counsel was appointed to represent him. Appellate counsel represents in the motion
that he learned from trial counsel that, prior to trial, appellant agreed with the State to waive his right to appeal in exchange for the State agreeing to drop the capital murder charge and proceed
to a jury on the open plea to a murder charge.
According to appellate counsel, on August 23, 2019, an informal hearing occurred to
address the plea agreement issue. The hearing was not recorded and the only written
documentation of its result are a docket sheet entry from the trial court judge stating appellant
had acknowledged he waived his right to appeal in exchange for the State reducing the capital
murder charge to murder and an email from the trial court coordinator relaying the trial court
judge’s recollection to appellate counsel.
Appellant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal could not have been voluntarily,
knowingly, and intelligently made because it was made pretrial and thus he could not know in
advance what errors would occur during his pending trial proceeding. Appellant questions
whether the waiver of such a critical right should be enforceable if it was not reduced to writing
and was not discussed in open court so as to ensure appellant’s understanding of the rights he
was waiving. Appellant contends that under the unusual circumstances of this case, it would be
inequitable to allow the waiver to foreclose his appeal as to the punishment phase of trial.
Appellant challenges the adequacy of the State’s consideration for the waiver. The State
contends appellant received sufficient consideration for the waiver of his right to appeal and the
existence of the waiver is confirmed by the trial court’s memorialization of it in the docket sheet.
There is no record before the Court other than what the parties have attached as exhibits
to the motion and response. To aid the Court in resolving appellant’s motion, we ORDER the
Dallas County District Clerk to file the clerk’s record within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this
order.
–2– There being no reporter’s record of the informal hearing in which appellant stated to the
trial court that he waived his right to appeal, we ORDER the trial court to conduct an
evidentiary hearing and prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding (1) whether
appellant and the State entered into a plea bargain agreement in which appellant agreed to waive
his right to appeal in exchange for consideration from the State; (2) whether any such agreement
between appellant and the State was reduced to writing; (3) the terms of any such agreement; (4)
whether appellant entered the agreement knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily; and (5) the
State’s motivations and consideration for any agreement with appellant.
We further ORDER the trial court to transmit, within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this
order, a supplemental clerk’s record containing a copy of the trial court’s findings of fact and
conclusions of law and a supplemental reporter’s record of the evidentiary hearing.
We ABATE the appeal to allow the trial court to conduct the hearing as ordered above.
The appeal will be reinstated when the supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s
findings is received or at such other time as the Court deems appropriate.
Upon reinstatement of the appeal, the Court will determine whether it has jurisdiction.
We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to transmit a copy of this order, by electronic
transmission to the Honorable Ernest White, Presiding Judge, 194th Judicial District Court; to
Belinda Baraka, official court reporter, 194th Judicial District Court; to Felicia Pitre, Dallas
County District Clerk; and to counsel for the parties.
/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
–3–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
David Lee Rickerson v. State (David Lee Rickerson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.