From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arterberry v. State

COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
Sep 24, 2014
NO. 12-14-00278-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 24, 2014)

Opinion

NO. 12-14-00278-CR

09-24-2014

STEPHAN FRANCIS ARTERBERRY, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE


APPEAL FROM THE 7TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant, Stephan Francis Arterberry, pleaded guilty to the offense of driving while intoxicated. Appellant signed an acknowledgment of admonishments, a stipulation of evidence, a waiver of jury trial, and an agreement to stipulate testimony. Appellant, his counsel, and counsel for the State also signed an agreed punishment recommendation. The trial court certified that this "is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has NO RIGHT OF APPEAL[.]" The trial court's certification is signed by the trial court, Appellant, and Appellant's counsel. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2) limits a defendant's right to appeal in a plea bargain case when he pleads guilty and his punishment does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Under those circumstances, the defendant may appeal only (1) matters raised by written motion and ruled on before trial or (2) after getting the trial court's permission to appeal. Id. Here, the trial court sentenced Appellant in accordance with the agreed recommendation by the State. The trial court did not give Appellant permission to appeal, and the record does not reflect that Appellant filed any pretrial motions. Therefore, we conclude that the certification of the right of appeal filed by the trial court is supported by the record and that Appellant has no right to appeal because he was sentenced pursuant to the agreed terms of a plea bargain and did not satisfy either of the exceptions stated in Rule 25.2(a)(2). Accordingly, we dismissthe appeal "without further action." See Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Opinion delivered September 24, 2014.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

JUDGMENT

Appeal from the 7th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 007-0802-14)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.


Summaries of

Arterberry v. State

COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
Sep 24, 2014
NO. 12-14-00278-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 24, 2014)
Case details for

Arterberry v. State

Case Details

Full title:STEPHAN FRANCIS ARTERBERRY, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

Court:COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

Date published: Sep 24, 2014

Citations

NO. 12-14-00278-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 24, 2014)