Donald Barnes v. State of Texas

57 S.W.3d 660, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 7181
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 24, 2001
Docket09-00-00397-CR
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 S.W.3d 660 (Donald Barnes v. State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Donald Barnes v. State of Texas, 57 S.W.3d 660, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 7181 (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinions

OPINION

WALKER, Chief Justice.

Donald Barnes pleaded guilty to evading detention, and also entered a plea of “true” to two prior felony convictions. See Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 38.04 (Vernon Supp. 2001). Barnes’s indictment did not allege whether the two prior convictions were sequential but rather stated that, prior to the commission of the primary offense, Barnes was convicted for one previous felony on January 9, 1992, and convicted for the second on May 4, 1992. The indictment did not provide the dates that the enhancement offenses were committed.

At the time of Barnes’s plea, the trial court questioned whether the prior of[661]*661fenses were required to be sequential, but ultimately accepted Barnes’s pleas. At the plea hearing, Barnes was admonished that the evading detention offense was a second degree felony, with a possible punishment range of two to twenty years and a possible fine of up to $10,000. Barnes and the State had agreed to a punishment recommendation of five years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The record reflects the trial court followed the punishment recommendation and assessed the five year punishment. The record, however, contains neither a motion for new trial, nor a request to the trial court for permission to appeal.

The general notice of appeal filed by Barnes does not comply with Tex.R.App. P. 25.2(b)(3), as it must in order for Barnes to pursue his appeal from a plea-bargained judgment. See Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 81 (Tex.Crim.App.2001). Therefore, pursuant to Rule 25.2(b)(3), this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider any matters raised by Barnes in his direct appeal. Barnes’s appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by this Court.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wood, Joe A. v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 S.W.3d 660, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 7181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-barnes-v-state-of-texas-texapp-2001.