Patrick Jerome Moore, Jr. v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 28, 2017
Docket02-17-00216-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Patrick Jerome Moore, Jr. v. State (Patrick Jerome Moore, Jr. 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
Patrick Jerome Moore, Jr. v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-17-00216-CR

PATRICK JEROME MOORE JR. APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM THE 371ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 1464926D

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

On November 8, 2017, we abated this appeal. In our abatement order, we

stated that we had reviewed the record and that we were concerned about

whether the appeal required dismissal because appellant Patrick Jerome Moore

Jr. had entered into a plea bargain. We explained that Moore’s plea of guilty to

sexual assault in exchange for the waiver of two counts of indecency with a child

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. by contact qualified as a plea bargain subject to rule of appellate procedure

25.2(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2) (restricting the right to appeal plea-

bargained convictions); Shankle v. State, 119 S.W.3d 808, 813–14 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2003); see also Kennedy v. State, 297 S.W.3d 338, 342 (Tex. Crim. App.

2009). We instructed the trial court to amend its certification of Moore’s right to

appeal and to indicate on the amended certification whether the trial court had

granted him permission to appeal or whether he had no right of appeal. See Tex.

R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), (f).

On November 16, 2017, the trial court signed an amended certification

stating that this is a plea bargain case and that Moore has “NO right of appeal.”

An appeal “must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the

right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

Under rule of appellate procedure 25.2, we must “dismiss a prohibited appeal

without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.” Chavez v. State,

183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

Because the trial court has certified that Moore has no right of appeal, we

dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 43.2(f); Chavez, 183

S.W.3d at 680; Serrell v. State, No. 02-16-00219-CR, 2016 WL 6648757, at *1

(Tex. App.—Fort Worth Nov. 10, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for

publication).

2 /s/ Wade Birdwell WADE BIRDWELL JUSTICE

PANEL: KERR, PITTMAN, and BIRDWELL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: December 28, 2017

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

Related

Chavez v. State
183 S.W.3d 675 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Kennedy v. State
297 S.W.3d 338 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2009)
Shankle v. State
119 S.W.3d 808 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Patrick Jerome Moore, Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-jerome-moore-jr-v-state-texapp-2017.