Mark Anthony Guajardo v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 23, 2015
Docket04-15-00626-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Mark Anthony Guajardo v. State (Mark Anthony Guajardo 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
Mark Anthony Guajardo v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 23, 2015

No. 04-15-00626-CR

Mark Anthony GUAJARDO, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013CR7064 Honorable Ray Olivarri, Judge Presiding

ORDER Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Marc Anthony Guajardo pled guilty OR nolo contendere to aggravated sexual assault of a child and was sentenced to thirty years and a fine of $1500 in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On September 1, 2015, the trial court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Guajardo filed a notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id. 25.2(d).

“In a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Guajardo does not have a right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d).

This appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that Guajardo has the right to appeal is made part of the appellate record by November 23, 2015. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order).

We ORDER all appellate deadlines be suspended until further order of the court.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 23rd day of October, 2015.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court

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

Related

Daniels v. State
110 S.W.3d 174 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mark Anthony Guajardo v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mark-anthony-guajardo-v-state-texapp-2015.