Leo Puente Espinoza v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 6, 2006
Docket14-06-00256-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Leo Puente Espinoza v. State (Leo Puente Espinoza 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.

Bluebook
Leo Puente Espinoza v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 6, 2006

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 6, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00256-CR

LEO PUENTE ESPINOZA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 907,939

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

After a plea of guilty, appellant was convicted of the offense of aggravated assauualt  and sentenced to confinement for eight years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on October 21, 2005. No timely motion for new trial was filed.  Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed until March 17, 2006.


A defendant=s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after sentence is imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).  A notice of appeal which complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction.  Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).  If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal.  Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal.  Id.

Furthermore, appellant entered a guilty plea and was sentenced in accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. 

The trial court entered a certification of the defendant=s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).  The trial court=s certification is included in the record on appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).  The record supports the trial court=s certification.  See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 6, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Hudson, Fowler, and Seymore.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Dears v. State
154 S.W.3d 610 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Slaton v. State
981 S.W.2d 208 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Leo Puente Espinoza v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leo-puente-espinoza-v-state-texapp-2006.