Jimmy Collier v. State
This text of Jimmy Collier v. State (Jimmy Collier 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.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-03-00159-CR
JIMMY COLLIER, Appellant
Â
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
                                             Â
On Appeal from the 115th Judicial District Court
Upshur County, Texas
Trial Court No. 13,248
                                                Â
Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter
MEMORANDUM OPINION
            Jimmy Collier has appealed from his conviction pursuant to his guilty plea for delivery of a controlled substance. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), the trial court has filed its certification of his right to appeal in which the trial court certified that this was a plea bargained case and that Collier has no right to appeal, and also that he has waived his right to appeal.
            Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) provides in pertinent part, "The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules." Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).
            The trial court's certification affirmatively shows that Collier has no right of appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See High v. State, No. 10-03-004-CR, 2003 WL 21299383 (Tex. App.âWaco June 4, 2003, no pet. h.) (not designated for publication).
                                                                        Jack Carter
                                                                        Justice
Date Submitted:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â December 11, 2003
Date Decided:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â December 12, 2003
Do Not Publish
will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal.
We overrule Remsburg's sole point of error and affirm the trial court's judgment.
Jack Carter
Justice
Date Submitted: March 5, 2007
Date Decided: March 30, 2007
1. If Remsburg had requested and received such an instruction, and if the jury had found him guilty of the attempted offense, rather than the offense alleged in the indictment, he would have faced a punishment assessed within the range provided for class A misdemeanor offenses. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 15.01(a), (d) (Vernon 2003). Alternatively, if the jury had found Remsburg guilty of only criminal trespass, he would have faced a punishment assessed within the range provided for class B misdemeanors. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.05 (Vernon Supp. 2006).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jimmy Collier v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jimmy-collier-v-state-texapp-2003.