Raymond Anthony Seymour v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Raymond Anthony Seymour v. State

DecidedMay 8, 2003

Docket14-03-00015-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Raymond Anthony Seymour v. State (Raymond Anthony Seymour 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

Raymond Anthony Seymour v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 8, 2003

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 8, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-03-00015-CR

RAYMOND ANTHONY SEYMOUR, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 232nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 911,509

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to possession of marijuana on December 13, 2002. In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant to eleven months in the Harris County Jail. Because we have no jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss.

To invoke an appellate court=s jurisdiction over an appeal, an appellant must give timely and proper notice of appeal. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Appellant filed a timely general notice of appeal that did not comply with the requirements of Rule 25.2(b)(3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3). Rule 25.2(b)(3) provides that when an appeal is from a judgment rendered on a defendant=s plea of guilty or nolo contendere and the punishment assessed does not exceed the punishment recommended by the State and agreed to by the defendant, the notice of appeal must: (1) specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect; (2) specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial; or (3) state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Id. Because appellant=s notice of appeal did not comply with the requirements of Rule 25.2(b)(3), we are without jurisdiction to consider any of appellant=s issues, including the voluntariness of the plea. See Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.2d 77, 83 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (holding that appellant who files general notice of appeal may not appeal voluntariness of negotiated plea).^{^[1]}

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed May 8, 2003.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Hudson and Frost.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

^{^[1]} The notice of appeal in this case was filed prior to the amendments to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure effective January 1, 2003.

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

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 8, 2003

Dismissed and Opinion filed May 8, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-03-00015-CR

RAYMOND ANTHONY SEYMOUR, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 232nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 911,509

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of nolo contendere to possession of marijuana on December 13, 2002. In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant to eleven months in the Harris County Jail. Because we have no jurisdiction over this appeal, we dismiss.

To invoke an appellate court=s jurisdiction over an appeal, an appellant must give timely and proper notice of appeal. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Appellant filed a timely general notice of appeal that did not comply with the requirements of Rule 25.2(b)(3) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3). Rule 25.2(b)(3) provides that when an appeal is from a judgment rendered on a defendant=s plea of guilty or nolo contendere and the punishment assessed does not exceed the punishment recommended by the State and agreed to by the defendant, the notice of appeal must: (1) specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect; (2) specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial; or (3) state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Id. Because appellant=s notice of appeal did not comply with the requirements of Rule 25.2(b)(3), we are without jurisdiction to consider any of appellant=s issues, including the voluntariness of the plea. See Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.2d 77, 83 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (holding that appellant who files general notice of appeal may not appeal voluntariness of negotiated plea).^{^[1]}

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed May 8, 2003.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Hudson and Frost.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

^{^[1]} The notice of appeal in this case was filed prior to the amendments to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure effective January 1, 2003.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Raymond Anthony Seymour v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-anthony-seymour-v-state-texapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack