Francisco Javier Olvera v. State of Texas

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Francisco Javier Olvera v. State of Texas. Read the opinion of the Court — 2000 Tex. App. LEXIS 8395
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 18, 2000·No. 07-00-00306-CR·Published

Opinion

NO. 07-00-0306-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

DECEMBER 18, 2000

______________________________

FRANCISCO JAVIER OLVERA, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_______________________________

FROM THE 263RD DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY;

NO. 824786; HONORABLE JIM WALLACE, JUDGE

Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND

This is an appeal by appellant Francisco Javier Olvera from a conviction and sentence in cause number 824786 in the 263rd District Court of Harris County, Texas (the trial court), for possession of a firearm before the fifth anniversary of his release from confinement pursuant to a prior felony conviction.  As part of a plea bargain, appellant executed a waiver of his right to appeal if the plea bargain agreement between appellant, his attorney, and the prosecutor was accepted by the trial court.   The trial court accepted the plea bargain, found appellant guilty, and sentenced appellant to the agreed-upon term of five years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.  Despite execution of a waiver of his right to appeal, appellant signed and filed (1) a pro se notice of appeal and request for permission of the trial court to appeal; (2) a document entitled Pauper’s Oath on Appeal by which appellant verified that he was too poor to employ counsel on appeal and requested appointment of counsel for appeal.  The trial court advised appellant that counsel for appeal would not be appointed, and so noted on appellant’s Pauper’s Oath.

The appellate court clerk has received and filed the trial court clerk’s record.  The trial court clerk’s record contains a waiver of appellant’s right to have a court reporter record his guilty plea proceeding, and no reporter’s record has been received by the appellate court clerk.  

The trial court clerk’s record reflects that, prior to appellant’s conviction, counsel (“trial counsel”) was appointed to represent appellant.  No order appears of record relieving trial counsel from his duty to represent appellant.   No separate appointment of counsel has been made for appeal.  No appearance has been made by any counsel for appellant on appeal.   See Tex. Crim.  Proc. Code  Ann . arts. 1.051.(c),(d), 26.04(a) (Vernon Supp. 2000) (footnote: 1); Tex. R. App. P . 6.4(b).

Pursuant to prior abatement and remand by this court, the trial court conducted a hearing and has forwarded a reporter’s record of such hearing for filing with the appellate clerk.  The record of the trial court hearing reflects findings and conclusions of the trial judge that appellant waived his right to appeal as part of the plea bargain process, the plea bargain was honored, and that appellant is not entitled to appointed counsel for an appeal from his conviction, but that appellant may prosecute his appeal pro se.  As part of the record of such hearing, the trial court attached copies of appellant’s waiver of appeal and other rights and written admonishments of appellant which were part of the plea bargain process, and references to legal authority upon which the trial court relied in reaching the conclusion that appellant is not entitled to appointed counsel on appeal, particularly noting the case of Blanco v. State , 18 S.W.3d 218 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000).

In Blanco , the Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed an appeal in which a defendant was convicted of burglary by a jury.  The defendant then made an agreement with the prosecution in which the defendant agreed to waive his right to appeal, in exchange for the prosecution’s promise to recommend to the trial court that the court assess a 16-year sentence.  The prosecution fulfilled its agreement by recommending the trial court sentence Blanco to 16 years confinement.  The trial court followed the prosecution’s recommendation and sentenced defendant to 16 years incarceration.  The defendant then filed a notice of appeal, despite his agreement not to do so.  The Court of Criminal Appeals noted, in affirming dismissal of the appeal by the court of appeals, that the considerations in post-conviction waiver cases are different than the considerations in pretrial waiver cases such as Ex parte Townsend , 538 S.W.2d 419 (Tex.Crim.App. 1976).   Blanco , 18 S.W.3d at 219-20.  In referencing Townsend , however, the Blanco Court did not indicate that Townsend was no longer viable.  

In Townsend , the defendant agreed in writing that he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right of appeal, pled guilty, and punishment was assessed by the trial court.  The defendant then timely filed a written notice of appeal.  The trial court entered an “Order Denying Defendant’s Notice of Appeal.”  On application for writ of habeas corpus, the Court of Criminal Appeals posed the issue as “. . . whether a defendant is bound by his agreement to waive appeal when the agreement is made prior to trial.”  In answering the question, the Court held “. . . as a matter of law, that a waiver of right of appeal made prior to trial cannot . . . be made knowingly and intelligently.  Such a waiver is therefore not binding on a defendant.” Id . at 420.

Our appellate jurisdiction has been invoked by appellant’s timely notice of appeal, see State v. Riewe , 13 S.W.3d 408, 410 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000), at least to the extent that we must determine if we have jurisdiction. State v. Roberts , 940 S.W.2d 655, 657 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996).  We are mindful that appellant’s notice of appeal is a general notice, and that such a notice has limits as to issues which can be asserted when appellant’s conviction was pursuant to a plea bargain.   See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(b)(3); Perez v. State , 4 S.W.3d 305, 306-07 (Tex.App.--Houston [1 st Dist.] 1999, no pet.).  But, a notice of appeal may be amended under certain circumstances in a criminal case, see Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(d), Perez , 4 S.W.3d at 306-07, and a claim that a defendant’s plea of guilty or nolo contendere was not voluntary can be asserted under a general notice of appeal, even though the plea was pursuant to a plea bargain honored by the trial court.   See Flowers v. 935 S.W.2d 131, 133-34 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996) (considering former Rule 40(b)(1)); Perez

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

Francisco Javier Olvera v. State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2000).

Francisco Javier Olvera v. State of Texas (Francisco Javier Olvera v. State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Blanco v. State
18 S.W.3d 218 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Ex Parte Townsend
538 S.W.2d 419 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
State v. Roberts
940 S.W.2d 655 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Villanueva v. State
977 S.W.2d 693 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
State v. Riewe
13 S.W.3d 408 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Perez v. State
4 S.W.3d 305 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Flowers v. State
935 S.W.2d 131 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Hernandez v. State
986 S.W.2d 817 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)