Paul Ross Kuykendall v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 1, 2010
Docket06-10-00018-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Paul Ross Kuykendall v. State (Paul Ross Kuykendall 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
Paul Ross Kuykendall v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

                                                         In The

                                                Court of Appeals

                        Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                                                ______________________________

                                                             No. 06-10-00018-CR

                                PAUL ROSS KUYKENDALL, Appellant

                                                                V.

                                     THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                                       On Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District Court

                                                             Lamar County, Texas

                                                            Trial Court No. 23,012

                                          Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

                                        Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss


                                                      MEMORANDUM OPINION

            Paul Ross Kuykendall has filed a notice of appeal from the revocation of his community supervision.  We have now received the certification of Kuykendall’s right of appeal as required by Rule 25.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2.  That certification states that Kuykendall waived his right of appeal.

            Unless a certification, showing that a defendant has the right of appeal, is in the record, we must dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).  Because the trial court’s certification affirmatively shows that Kuykendall has waived his right of appeal, and because the record before us does not reflect that the certification is incorrect, see Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005), we must dismiss the appeal.

            We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction and overrule Kuykendall’s motion for appointment of counsel.

                                                                        Josh R. Morriss, III

                                                                        Chief Justice

Date Submitted:          February 26, 2010

Date Decided:             March 1, 2010

Do Not Publish          

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

Related

Dears v. State
154 S.W.3d 610 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Paul Ross Kuykendall v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-ross-kuykendall-v-state-texapp-2010.