Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto
Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Leticia Miller Curtis v. The State of Texas
MoreLaw Performance Marketing
Case Number: 11-18-00209-CR
Judge: PER CURIAM
Court: Eleventh Court of Appeals
Plaintiff's Attorney: James Hicks, District Attorney
Defendant's Attorney: Paul W. Hanneman
Description: This court notified Appellant by letter that we had received information from the trial court that this is a plea bargain case in which Appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d). We requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue the appeal. Appellant filed a response, but it does not provide any grounds upon which this appeal may continue. Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that, in a plea bargain case in which the punishment does not exceed the punishment agreed to in the plea bargain, “a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal.” The documents on file in this appeal reflect that Appellant entered into a plea bargain, that her punishment was assessed in accordance with the plea bargain, and that Appellant waived her right of appeal. The trial court certified that Appellant has no right of appeal. Both the plea agreement and the trial court’s certification were signed by Appellant, Appellant’s counsel, and the judge of the trial court. The documents on file in this court support the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we must dismiss this appeal without further action. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Outcome: Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.