Martin Anthony Casarez v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 5, 2008
Docket04-08-00672-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Martin Anthony Casarez v. State (Martin Anthony Casarez 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
Martin Anthony Casarez v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00672-CR

Martin Anthony CASAREZ, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2007-CR-8706 Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice Catherine Stone, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 5, 2008

DISMISSED

Martin Anthony Casarez pleaded nolo contendere to murder committed under the immediate

influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause and signed a waiver of appeal. The trial

court found Casarez guilty, sentenced him to eighteen years confinement in the Texas Department

of Criminal Justice – Institutional Division, and signed a certificate 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). Casarez timely filed 04-08-00672-CR

a notice of appeal. The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification,

has been filed. See TEX . R. APP . P. 25.2(d).

On October 1, 2008, we gave Casarez notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless an

amended trial court certification showing he has the right to appeal has been made part of the

appellate record by October 31, 2008. See TEX . R. APP . P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL

21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication).

No amended certification showing Casarez has the right to appeal has been filed. Instead,

counsel responded to our notice by filing a brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We do not consider the brief. The motion to withdraw and the

appeal are dismissed. See TEX . R. APP . P. 25.2(d).

Do not publish

-2-

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Daniels v. State
110 S.W.3d 174 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Martin Anthony Casarez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-anthony-casarez-v-state-texapp-2008.