Jeremy Holmes v. the State of Texas
This text of Jeremy Holmes v. the State of Texas (Jeremy Holmes v. the State of Texas) 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
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-21-00153-CR
JEREMY HOLMES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 336th District Court Fannin County, Texas Trial Court No. CR-20-27909
Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and van Cleef, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Stevens MEMORANDUM OPINION
Jeremy Holmes timely perfected an appeal from his conviction of manufacture/delivery
of a controlled substance in a drug-free zone and the resulting sentence of thirty-five years’
imprisonment. On January 13, 2022, the trial court certified that this was not a plea-bargain case
and that Holmes had the right of appeal. Then, on April 22, 2022, the trial court filed a revised
certification indicating that Holmes had subsequently waived his right of appeal. The following
was handwritten on the revised certification: “def[endant] pled in other cases and relinquished
right to appeal in this case as part of the plea agreement.”
“A court of appeals lacks jurisdiction over and must dismiss an appeal when the
defendant has validly waived his right of appeal.” Lopez v. State, 595 S.W.3d 897, 899 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, pet. ref’d) (citing Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d 801, 808 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2016)); see also Freeman v. State, 913 S.W.2d 714 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1995, pet.
ref’d). Further, pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this Court is
required to dismiss an appeal if, as in this case, the trial court’s certification indicates no right of
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
Upon receipt of the trial court’s revised certification, we informed Holmes, through his
appellate counsel, of the apparent defect in our jurisdiction over his appeal and afforded him an
opportunity to respond and, if possible, cure such defect. In response, Holmes filed a motion to
dismiss his appeal in which he conceded that he had waived his right to appeal in this case as
part of a plea agreement disposing of another case. However, the motion to dismiss was not
signed by Holmes as required by Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See
2 TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Consequently, we cannot grant the motion to dismiss and instead deny it
is as moot.
Because Holmes has no right of appeal due to his waiver of that right and because the
trial court’s certification correctly indicates that he is without a right of appeal, we dismiss this
appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Scott E. Stevens Justice Date Decided: May 6, 2022 Date Decided May 9, 2022
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jeremy Holmes v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeremy-holmes-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.