Francisco Trujillo v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 22, 2004
• Docket: 04-04-00089-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Nos. 04-04-00089-CR & 04-04-00090-CR

Francisco TRUJILLO,

Appellant

v.

STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 2003-CR-8454 & 2003-CR-7641

Honorable Mary Roman, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Paul W. Green, Justice

Sitting: Paul W. Green, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 22, 2004

DISMISSED

Pursuant to two separate plea bargain agreements, Francisco Trujillo pled nolo contendere to possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance and driving while intoxicated-third offense. He was sentenced within the terms of the plea bargain for each charge. On January 14, 2004, the trial court imposed sentence and signed a certificate for each case, stating as to each that this "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a). After Trujillo timely filed a general notice of appeal for each case, the clerk sent copies of the certifications and notices of appeal to this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(e). The clerk's records, which include the trial court's Rule 25.2(a)(2) certifications, have been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

"In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court's permission to appeal." Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk's records, which contain a written plea bargain for each charge, establish that the punishments assessed by the court do not exceed the punishments recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Trujillo. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk's records do not contain written motions ruled on before trial nor do they indicate the trial court granted Trujillo permission to appeal. The trial court's certifications therefore accurately reflect that these are plea bargain cases and Trujillo does not have the right to appeal. This court must dismiss an appeal "if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made a part of the record." Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

On March 12, 2004, ⁽¹⁾ and April 14, 2004, ⁽²⁾ we gave Trujillo notice that the appeals would be dismissed unless amended certifications showing he has the right to appeal were made part of the record within thirty days. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 2003, interlocutory order) (en banc). Amended certifications showing Trujillo has the right to appeal have not been filed. We therefore dismiss these appeals. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

Paul W. Green, Justice

Do Not Publish

1. Cause no. 04-04-00089-CR.

2. Cause no. 04-04-00090-CR.