Martin Perez Leal v. the State of Texas
This text of Martin Perez Leal v. the State of Texas (Martin Perez Leal 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
NUMBER 13-21-00296-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
MARTIN PEREZ LEAL, Appellant,
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the 24th District Court of De Witt County, Texas.
ORDER Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Martin Perez Leal, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his
conviction in trial court cause number 21-07-13,626. The trial court’s certification of the
defendant’s right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to appeal.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an
appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that a defendant has a right of appeal is not made a part of the record. Id. R. 25.2(d); see id. R. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. The
purpose of the certification requirement is to efficiently sort appealable cases from non-
appealable cases so that appealable cases can “move through the system unhindered
while eliminating, at an early stage, the time and expense associated with non-
appealable cases.” Greenwell v. Ct. of Apps. for the Thirteenth Jud. Dist., 159 S.W.3d
645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see Hargesheimer v. State, 182 S.W.3d 906, 912
(Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Within thirty days of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel, Travis Berry,
is hereby ORDERED to: 1) review the record; 2) determine whether appellant has a
right to appeal; and 3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings as to whether
appellant has a right to appeal and/or advise this Court as to the existence of any
amended certification.
If appellant’s counsel determines that appellant has a right to appeal, counsel is
further ORDERED to file a motion with this Court within thirty days of this notice,
identifying and explaining substantive reasons why appellant has a right to appeal. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4; Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614–15 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005); see also, e.g., Carroll v. State, 119 S.W.3d 838, 841 (Tex. App.—San Antonio
2003, no pet.) (certification form provided in appendix to appellate rules may be
modified to reflect that defendant has right of appeal under circumstances not
addressed by the form). The motion must include an analysis of the applicable case
law, and any factual allegations therein must be true and supported by the record. See
Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614–15; cf. Woods v. State, 108 S.W.3d 314, 316 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2003) (construing former appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) and holding that recitations in
the notice of appeal must be true and supported by the record). Copies of record
2 documents necessary to evaluate the alleged error in the certification affecting
appellant’s right to appeal shall be attached to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1,
10.2.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered and filed on the 20th day of September, 2021.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Martin Perez Leal v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-perez-leal-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.