Martin Renteria v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: April 24, 2008
• Docket: 13-07-00321-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-07-321-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

______________________________________________________________

MARTIN RENTERIA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

_____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 28th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

______________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant, Martin Renteria, pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child, indecency with a child, and attempted indecency with a child in trial court cause number 05-CR-1816-A. The trial court sentenced appellant in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. The trial court's certification of appellant's right to appeal shows that this is a "plea bargain case, and the Defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that, in a plea bargain case, a defendant may appeal only those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or after getting the trial court's permission to appeal. See id. We have reviewed the clerk's record filed in this cause, and there is nothing in the record to indicate that either situation applies in the instant case. The record supports the trial court's certification stating that the sentence in this case was the result of a plea bargain and that appellant has no right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court's certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); see Tex. R. App. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED. 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 who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2 (a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action). Pending motions, if any, are DISMISSED AS MOOT.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 24th day of April, 2008.