Mountanez Kareem Robinson, Jr. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
• Decided: February 11, 2026
• Docket: 04-25-00660-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00660-CR

Mountanez Kareem ROBINSON, Jr., Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 454th Judicial District Court, Medina County, Texas Trial Court No. 25-03-15560-CR Honorable Daniel J. Kindred, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 11, 2026

APPEAL DISMISSED

Appellant Mountanez Kareem Robinson, Jr. filed a notice of appeal from a negotiated plea.

The clerk’s record contains a trial court’s certification stating “this criminal case [] is a plea-

bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal unless the punishment assessed exceeds

the cap of 16 years.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). “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,

(B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal; or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly 04-25-00660-CR

authorized by statute.” Id. 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. R. 25.2(d).

The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment assessed did not

exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by appellant. The clerk’s

record also does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate

the trial court gave appellant permission to appeal. Thus, the trial court’s certification appears to

accurately reflect this is a plea-bargain case, and appellant does not have a right to appeal. See id.

R. 25.2; Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

On November 12, 2025, we ordered that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to rule

25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that appellant has the right to appeal

was made part of the appellate record by December 12, 2025. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1;

see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). No amended

trial court certification has been filed. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-