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
Tray Demond Gambles v. The State of Texas
Case Number: No. 02-19-00081-CR No. 02-19-00082-CR No. 02-19-00083-CR No. 02-19-00084-CR No. 02-19-00085-CR No. 02-19-00086-CR No. 02-19-00087-CR No. 02-19-00088-CR No. 02-19-00089-CR
Judge: Per Curiam
Court: Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth
Plaintiff's Attorney: Joseph W. Spence
Defendant's Attorney: Charles H. Roach
Appellant agreed to plead guilty to eight separately charged counts of
aggravated robbery, see Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03(a), (b), a first-degree felony, id.
§ 12.32, in exchange for the State’s offer of a twenty-year prison sentence for each
offense, and he agreed to plead guilty to one count of aggravated assault with a deadly
weapon, a second-degree felony, see id. § 22.02(a)(2), (b), in exchange for the State’s
offer of a ten-year sentence. Appellant judicially confessed, admitted that the deadly
weapon allegation for each offense was true, and waived all pretrial motions and all
rights of appeal. The trial court’s certification in each case provides that the case is
plea-bargained and Appellant has no right of appeal; each certification also provides
that Appellant waived all rights of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).
Accordingly, we informed Appellant by letter that his appeals would be subject
to dismissal based on the trial court’s certifications unless he or any party desiring to
continue the appeals filed a response showing grounds for continuing them. We have
received no response.
Rule 25.2(a) allows a plea-bargaining defendant to appeal only matters raised by
written motion and ruled on before trial or only with the trial court’s permission. Tex.
R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant waived any pretrial motions as part of his bargain in
each case, and the trial court did not give him permission to appeal. Appellant
therefore has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a), (d). Further, this court
has no authority to do anything but dismiss the appeals. See Chavez v. State,
183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Outcome: Thus, we dismiss these appeals in conformity with the trial court’s certifications