Eric Daniel Maldonado v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 9, 2013
Docket03-12-00725-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Eric Daniel Maldonado v. State (Eric Daniel Maldonado 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
Eric Daniel Maldonado v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00725-CR

Eric Daniel Maldonado, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, 421ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 2011-086, HONORABLE TODD A. BLOMERTH, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant Eric Daniel Maldonado has filed a notice of appeal from the district court’s

judgment revoking Maldonado’s deferred-adjudication community supervision and adjudicating him

guilty of the offense of possession of a controlled substance. The clerk’s record contains a trial-court

certification indicating that this is a plea-bargain case and that Maldonado has no right of appeal.

However, that certification relates to the original order of deferred adjudication. The record does

not contain a certification of Maldonado’s right to appeal the judgment adjudicating guilt.

The rules of appellate procedure provide, “The trial court shall enter a certification

of the defendant’s right of appeal each time it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order.”

Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Accordingly, the district court is required to enter a written certification

of Maldonado’s right of appeal from the judgment adjudicating guilt. See Durgan v. State,

240 S.W.3d 875, 877-78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). We abate this cause and remand it to the district court for entry of a proper

certification of Maldonado’s right of appeal from the judgment adjudicating guilt. See Dears

v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Hargesheimer v. State, 182 S.W.3d

906, 909 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (holding that case in which defendant pleads true to allegations

in motion to adjudicate is not considered plea-bargain case for purposes of rule 25.2(a)(2)). Once

entered, the certification shall be included in a supplemental clerk’s record and filed with this Court

no later than May 20, 2013.

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Rose

Abated

Filed: May 9, 2013

Do Not Publish

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)
Hargesheimer v. State
182 S.W.3d 906 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Durgan v. State
240 S.W.3d 875 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Eric Daniel Maldonado v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eric-daniel-maldonado-v-state-texapp-2013.