Khairi Jihad Richardson v. the State of Texas
This text of Khairi Jihad Richardson v. the State of Texas (Khairi Jihad Richardson 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
Opinion issued February 25, 2025
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00741-CR ——————————— KHAIRI JIHAD RICHARDSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 230th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1765451
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Khairi Jihad Richardson, without an agreed punishment
recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the -felony offense of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon.1 The trial court found appellant guilty and assessed
appellant’s punishment at confinement for twelve years. Appellant timely filed a
notice of appeal.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure clearly set out the right to appeal for
criminal defendants. See Lagunas v. State, No. 01-20-00279-CR, 2020 WL
5823291, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 1, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.,
not designated for publication). Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2 states that
in a case where a defendant has voluntarily pleaded guilty, the defendant may only
appeal those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before
trial or after getting the trial court’s permission. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2); see
also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. The trial court must sign a certification
of a defendant’s right of appeal each time it enters a judgment of guilt or other
appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a
certification showing that the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part
of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2005).
Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). It states that this “[i]s a plea-bargain case[] and [appellant]
1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03(a)(2), (b).
2 has NO right of appeal.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant signed the trial
court’s certification. The trial court’s judgment also states: “APPEAL WAIVED,
NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED.” The record supports the trial court’s
certification.
Although a defendant has a statutory right to appeal his conviction, a
defendant may waive his right to appeal in all but capital cases. Carson v. State, 559
S.W.3d 489, 492–93 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). A valid waiver of appeal—one made
voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently—prevents a defendant from appealing
without the trial court’s consent. See id.; Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694, 697–
99 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Flores v. State, Nos. 01-20-00243-CR to
01-20-00246-CR, 2020 WL 2988564, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 4,
2020, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). “[A] defendant may
knowingly and intelligently waive his appeal as part of a plea when consideration is
given by the State, even when sentencing is not agreed upon.” Carson, 559 S.W.3d
at 494; see Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d 801, 804–08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016)
(explaining presentence waivers of right of appeal have been upheld when record
showed defendant received consideration for waiver); see also TEX. CODE CRIM.
PROC. ANN. art. 1.14(a) (“The defendant in a criminal prosecution for any offense
may waive any rights secured him by law . . . .”); Flores, 2020 WL 2988564, at *1.
3 Here, as part of his guilty plea, appellant signed a “Waiver of Constitutional
Rights, Agreement to Stipulate, and Judicial Confession,” stating:
. . . I intend to enter a plea of guilty without an agreed recommendation of punishment from the [State] and request that my punishment should be set by the [j]udge after a pre-sentence investigation report and hearing. I understand the [S]tate reserves the right to argue for full punishment at my sentencing hearing. . . . Further, in exchange for the [S]tate giving up [its] right to trial, I agree to waive any right of appeal which I may have.[2]
(Emphasis omitted.) In exchange for appellant’s waiver of his right to appeal, the
State agreed to waive its right to a jury trial or, more precisely, the State consented
to appellant’s waiver of his right to jury trial. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art.
1.13(a) (“The defendant in a criminal prosecution for any offense other than a capital
felony case in which the [S]tate notifies the court and the defendant that it will seek
the death penalty shall have the right, upon entering a plea, to waive the right of trial
by jury, conditioned, however, that, except as provided by [Texas Code of Criminal
Procedure] [a]rticle 27.19, the waiver must be made in person by the defendant in
writing in open court with the consent and approval of the court, and the attorney
representing the [S]tate.” (emphasis added)); see also Harrison v. State, No.
01-20-00093-CR, 2020 WL 7776082, at *2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec.
2 Appellant also signed a document titled, “Advice of Defendant’s Right of Appeal,” which advised appellant that if he “waived or gave up [his] right to appeal, [he] c[ould not] appeal [his] conviction.” (Emphasis omitted.) In signing that document, appellant affirmed that he “read and wr[o]te English” and he had read and understood the document.
4 31, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Flores, 2020 WL
2988564, at *2. By agreeing to waive its right to a jury trial, the State gave
consideration for appellant’s waiver of his right to appeal. See Carson, 559 S.W.3d
at 492–96; Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d at 695–99; see also Lagunas, 2020 WL
5823291, at *1 (defendant voluntarily waived his statutorily created right of appeal
in exchange for State waiving its right to jury trial); Flores, 2020 WL 2988564, at
*2.
Although appellant attempts to appeal from the trial court’s judgment of
conviction, the record is clear that appellant voluntarily waived his statutorily
created right of appeal in exchange for the State waiving its right to a jury trial.
Lewis v. State, No. 01-22-00303-CR, 2022 WL 17490998, at *3 (Tex. App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 25, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for
publication). If a defendant validly waives his right to appeal but nonetheless
appeals, we must dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Chavez v. State,
183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having
jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant . . . is permitted to appeal by [Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure] 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without
further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”); see, e.g., Lewis, 2022 WL
17490998, at *1–3; Badyrka v. State, No. 01-21-00339-CR, 2021 WL 5312651, at
5 *1–2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 16, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op., not
designated for publication).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 43.2(f). We dismiss all pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Morgan.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Khairi Jihad Richardson v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khairi-jihad-richardson-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.