Tammy Townsley Cheek v. State
Opinion
NO. 07-02-0072-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
JUNE 20, 2002 ________________________________
TAMMY TOWNSLEY CHEEK
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee _________________________________
FROM THE 64TH DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;
NO. A-14198-0109; HON. JACK R. MILLER, PRESIDING _______________________________
Dismissal _______________________________
Before BOYD, C.J., QUINN, and REAVIS, JJ.
Tammy Townsley Cheek (appellant) appealed her conviction for theft. The
conviction and judgment manifesting same was entered upon her plea of guilty and plea
bargain with the State. Furthermore, the sentence imposed by the trial court did not
exceed the punishment recommended by the State and agreed to by the appellant. We
dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Appellant filed a general notice of appeal. Yet, because she pled guilty and the
sentence assessed by the trial court did not exceed the parameters of the plea bargain,
she was required to comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(b)(3). That is,
she was required to recite in her notice that she was appealing based upon jurisdictional
defects, that the substance of her appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before
trial, or that the trial court granted her permission to appeal.1 None of these statements
appear in the notice, however. Consequently, we lack jurisdiction to entertain the
proceeding. Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Do Not Publish.
1 The record reflects that the trial court denied appellant permission to appeal.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Tammy Townsley Cheek v. State (Tammy Townsley Cheek v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.