Stephaney Veljean Lafears v. the State of Texas
This text of Stephaney Veljean Lafears v. the State of Texas (Stephaney Veljean Lafears v. the State of Texas) 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
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-24-00335-CR
Stephaney Veljean Lafears, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, NO. 23-01350-3, THE HONORABLE DOUG ARNOLD, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Stephaney Veljean Lafears filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial
court’s purported interlocutory denials 1 of her Amended Motion to Quash Information, Motion
to Dismiss, and Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus. On July 17, 2024, a supplemental
clerk’s record was filed containing plea-bargain documents, an order placing Lafears on
deferred-adjudication community supervision for nine months for assault causing bodily injury,
and the trial court’s certification that Lafears had no right of appeal and had waived the right of
appeal in this case.
We agree that the trial court’s certification is supported by the record. See Dears
v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (requiring court of appeals to determine
whether certification is defective when compared to record). As part of her plea bargain, in
1 Although the record before us includes the docket entry, “State’s motion for leave to amend information granted. Motion to quash/dismiss denied,” the record contains no signed written orders from the trial court. See Dewalt v. State, 417 S.W.3d 678, 685 n.32 (Tex. App.— Austin 2013, pet. ref’d) (“A written and signed appealable order is a prerequisite to invoking this Court’s appellate jurisdiction.”). which the State agreed to drop a family-violence finding and recommend a period of nine
months of deferred adjudication, Lafears waived her right “to file a motion for new trial or
appeal [her] case to a court of appeals.” See Marsh v. State, 444 S.W.3d 654, 660 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2014) (explaining that although “Rule 25.2(a)(2)(A) does, in fact, grant defendants who
plead guilty as part of a plea bargain the right to appeal pretrial motions, . . . a defendant may
waive this right, as long as the waiver is made ‘voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.’”). The
trial court approved the waivers and certified that: (1) this is a plea-bargain case, for which
Lafears had no right of appeal, see Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); (2) she waived the right of appeal;
and (3) she also “waive[d] appeal in COA 03-24-00394-CV,” a case in this Court in which
Lafears filed an original habeas application raising the same substantive issue as in her
interlocutory filings. See Ex parte Lafears, No. 03-24-00394-CV, 2024 WL 3088680, at *2
(Tex. App.—Austin June 21, 2024, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.
P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).
__________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice
Before Justices Baker, Smith, and Theofanis
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: August 23, 2024
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Stephaney Veljean Lafears v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephaney-veljean-lafears-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.