M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto

Information
About MoreLaw
Contact MoreLaw

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

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 02-11-2019

Case Style:

Carlos Aleman v. The State of Texas

Case Number: 14-18-00346-CR

Judge: PER CURIAM

Court: Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Plaintiff's Attorney: John Harrity, III

Defendant's Attorney: Michael Paul Nassif

Description:




MoreLaw Helps People Find Lawyers



Although the trial court mistakenly entered a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is not a plea bargain case and the defendant has the right of appeal as to punishment, we have no jurisdiction over the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). An agreement that places a cap on punishment is a plea bargain for purposes of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2). Shankle v. State, 119 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Waters v. State, 124 S.W.3d 825, 826–27 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. ref’d) (holding reviewing court lacked jurisdiction where defendant pleaded guilty with a sentencing cap of ten years, even though trial judge mistakenly certified defendant had right of appeal); Threadgill v. State, 120 S.W.3d 871, 872 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no. pet.) (holding statement in record indicating that there was no agreed recommendation did not convert proceeding to an open plea where plea was entered pursuant to agreed sentencing cap). Because appellant’s plea was made pursuant to a plea bargain, he may appeal only matters raised by a written pretrial motion or with the trial court’s permission. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant’s counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Appellant does not challenge any pretrial rulings. The trial court’s erroneous certification that the case is not a plea bargain case does not constitute permission to appeal. See Waters, 124 S.W.3d at 826–27.

Outcome: Accordingly, we dismiss the 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
© 1996-2019 MoreLaw, Inc. - All rights reserved.