Ricardo Octavio Rivas v. State
This text of Ricardo Octavio Rivas v. State (Ricardo Octavio Rivas 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.
Opinion
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 8, 2005.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-05-00913-CR
RICARDO OCTAVIO RIVAS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 262nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 988,731
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant entered a guilty plea to felony driving while intoxicated. In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant on July 20, 2004, to confinement for four years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, probated for four years, and assessed a $500 fine. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on July 27, 2005, more than one year after he was sentenced. Because we lack jurisdiction and appellant has no right to appeal, we dismiss.
A defendant=s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after sentence is imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal which complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id.
Moreover, the trial court entered a certification of the defendant=s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court=s certification is included in the record on appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed September 8, 2005.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Anderson.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ricardo Octavio Rivas v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricardo-octavio-rivas-v-state-texapp-2005.