M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto

 
Home
Verdicts
and
Decisions
Search Database
Recent Cases
Cases By Subject
Report A Case
Lawyers
Search Directory
By State & City
Add A
Lawyer Listing
Court
Reporters
Recent Listings
Search
By States & City
Add A Basic
Reporter Listing
Expert
Witnesses
Recent Listings
Search Directory
By State & Expertise
Add A Basic
Expert Witness
Listing
MoreLaw
Store
The Store
Recent Listings
(Search)
Add A Basic
Classified Ad
Links
County Seats
State Links
Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw

Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Date: 11-10-2017

Case Style:

Francisco R. Herrera v. The State of Texas

Case Number: 04-17-00537-CR

Judge: Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Court: Court of Appeals - 4th District | Bexar County, TX

Plaintiff's Attorney: Nicholas A. LaHood

Defendant's Attorney:

Patrick Barry Montgomery

Description: Pursuant to a plea agreement with the State, appellant Jose Luis Lopez pled guilty to the
offense of aggravated robbery, enhanced. The trial court imposed a sentence in the case in
accordance with the agreement and signed a certificate stating this “[is] a plea-bargain case, and
the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant timely filed a
notice of appeal. The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s rule 25.2(a)(2) certification
and written plea bargain agreement, has also been filed. See id. R. 25.2(d).

The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court in this case does not
exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id. R.
25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record also establishes the trial court did not give appellant permission to
appeal. After reviewing the clerk’s record, the trial court’s certification accurately reflects that
this is a plea bargain case and Lopez does not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154
S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to
determine whether trial court’s certification is accurate). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a
certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.”
TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
On September 19, 2017, we gave appellant notice that the appeal would be dismissed
unless an amended trial court certification showing he has the right to appeal was made part of the
appellate record by October 19, 2017. See id. R. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174
(Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347
(July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication).

Outcome: Neither an amended certification nor other response has been filed. We therefore dismiss this appeal.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



 
 
Home | Add Attorney | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Sign In
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City | Articles | Recent Lawyer Listings
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2017 MoreLaw, Inc. - All rights reserved.