Dustin Maurer v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 13, 2016
Docket05-16-00393-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Dustin Maurer v. State (Dustin Maurer v. State) 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
Dustin Maurer v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion Filed April 13, 2016.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00393-CR

DUSTIN MAURER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15-30809-R

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Bridges and Evans Opinion by Justice Evans

Dustin Maurer pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine in an amount of one

gram or more but less than four grams. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced

appellant to four years’ imprisonment.1 Appellant waived his right to appeal as part of the plea

agreement. See Blanco v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 219–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). The trial court

certified both that appellant had no right to appeal from the plea bargain and that he waived his

right to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a), (d); Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). Sentence was imposed in open court on December 8, 2015.

1 The written plea agreement reflects that the charge was also reduced from possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams to the lesser possession offense to which he pleaded guilty. See Shankle v. State, 118 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (discussing charge bargaining aspect of plea bargains). In addition to appellant not having the right to appeal his plea-bargained conviction and

sentence, appellant’s April 1, 2016 notice of appeal is untimely as to his December 8, 2015

sentencing date. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction.

/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 160393F.U05

–2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

DUSTIN MAURER, Appellant On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-16-00393-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F15-30809-R. Opinion delivered by Justice Evans, Chief THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justice Wright and Justice Bridges participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Judgment entered this 13th day of April, 2016.

–3–

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

Related

Dears v. State
154 S.W.3d 610 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Blanco v. State
18 S.W.3d 218 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Anderson v. Long
118 S.W.3d 806 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dustin Maurer v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dustin-maurer-v-state-texapp-2016.