Ex Parte Mauren Martinez
This text of Ex Parte Mauren Martinez (Ex Parte Mauren Martinez) 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.
Opinion
NUMBER 13-22-00164-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Ex parte Mauren Martinez
On appeal from the 156th District Court of Bee County, Texas.
ORDER Before Justices Benavides, Hinojosa, and Silva Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Mauren Martinez, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his
conviction in trial court cause number B-21-2094-2-CR-B. The trial court’s certification of
the defendant’s right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
provide that an appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that a defendant has
a right of appeal is not made a part of the record. Id. R. 25.2(d); see id. R. 37.1, 44.3,
44.4. The purpose of the certification requirement is to efficiently sort appealable cases from non-appealable cases so that appealable cases can “move through the system
unhindered while eliminating, at an early stage, the time and expense associated with
non-appealable cases.” Greenwell v. Ct. of Apps. for the Thirteenth Jud. Dist., 159
S.W.3d 645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see Hargesheimer v. State, 182 S.W.3d 906,
912 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Within thirty days of date of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel,
Jeremy Habash, is hereby ORDERED to: 1) review the record; 2) determine whether
appellant has a right to appeal; and 3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings
as to whether appellant has a right to appeal and/or advise this Court as to the
existence of any amended certification. If appellant’s counsel determines that appellant
has a right to appeal, counsel is further ORDERED to file a motion with this Court within
thirty days of this notice, identifying and explaining substantive reasons why appellant
has a right to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4; Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610,
614–15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also, e.g., Carroll v. State, 119 S.W.3d 838, 841
(Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.) (certification form provided in appendix to
appellate rules may be modified to reflect that defendant has right of appeal under
circumstances not addressed by the form). The motion must include an analysis of the
applicable case law, and any factual allegations therein must be true and supported by
the record. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614–15; cf. Woods v. State, 108 S.W.3d 314,
316 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (construing former appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) and holding that
recitations in the notice of appeal must be true and supported by the record). Copies of
record documents necessary to evaluate the alleged error in the certification affecting
appellant’s right to appeal shall be attached to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1,
10.2.
2 PER CURIAM
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed on the 21st day of June 2022.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte Mauren Martinez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-mauren-martinez-texapp-2022.