Joan Rafael Sustaita Serna v. the State of Texas
This text of Joan Rafael Sustaita Serna v. the State of Texas (Joan Rafael Sustaita Serna 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
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00591-CR
Joan Rafael SUSTAITA SERNA, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the County Court at Law No. 8, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2025-CC-008252 Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 5, 2025
DISMISSED
Appellant was charged by information with the misdemeanor offense of driving while
intoxicated with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15 or more. TEX. PENAL CODE § 49.04(d).
Appellant initially pleaded not guilty and requested that the jury assess punishment in the event it
found her guilty. On August 21, 2025, a Bexar County jury found appellant guilty of the charged
offense. 04-25-00591-CR
The trial court’s judge’s notes indicate that after the jury reached its guilty verdict, “[t]he
parties reached an [agreement] to 89 days confinement.” On August 21, 2025, appellant signed a
“Defendant’s Waiver of Constitutional Rights and Court’s Admonitions” in which she, inter alia,
entered a plea of guilty, waived her right to a jury trial, and indicated that she understood “that the
Court must give [her] permission in order to appeal any non-jurisdictional defendant that occurred
prior to entry of [her] plea, unless the appeal relates to matters raised by written motion filed by
[her] or [her] attorney prior to trial that were ruled on by the Court[.]” This waiver was file-stamped
approximately one hour after the time stamped on the jury’s guilty verdict.
The trial court, appellant, and appellant’s attorney also signed a Certification of
Defendant’s Right of Appeal in which the trial court “certif[ied] this criminal case . . . is a plea
bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal[.]” The trial court’s certification was
followed by a handwritten notation, “jury found [defendant] guilty[.]” Like the appellant’s waiver,
the trial court’s certification appears to have been file-stamped approximately an hour after the
jury rendered its verdict. That same day, the trial court signed a judgment of conviction sentencing
appellant to 89 days in the Bexar County Jail.
The clerk’s record does not contain a written plea bargain agreement. However, the record
appears to show that after the jury reached its verdict on guilt-innocence, appellant changed her
plea to guilty, waived her right to have the jury decide her punishment, and waived her right to
appeal in exchange for the prosecutor’s agreement to a specific punishment. See Carson v. State,
559 S.W.3d 489, 494 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018) (“[A] defendant may knowingly and intelligently
waive his appeal as part of a plea when consideration is given by the State[.]”). The record further
shows that the trial court assessed a punishment consistent with the agreement between appellant
and the prosecutor. Accordingly, the trial court’s certification appears to accurately reflect that
-2- 04-25-00591-CR
appellant’s case is a plea bargain case and appellant does not have a right of appeal. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).
This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right
of appeal has not been made part of the record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, on
September 24, 2025, we issued an order notifying appellant that we would dismiss this appeal
unless an amended trial court certification showing that appellant has the right of appeal was made
part of the appellate record by October 24, 2025. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see also Dears v.
State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614–15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 176–
77 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.).
No amended certification has been filed, and appellant has not otherwise responded to our
order. We therefore dismiss this appeal.
DO NOT PUBLISH
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Joan Rafael Sustaita Serna v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joan-rafael-sustaita-serna-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.