Opinion
No. 13-05-479-CR
Memorandum Opinion Delivered and Filed March 23, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 197th District Court of Cameron County, Texas.
Before Justices HINOJOSA, YAÑEZ, and GARZA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant, Juan Calvillo, Jr., pleaded guilty to murder. The trial court's certification of Calvillo's right to appeal shows that this is a "plea bargain case, and the Defendant has NO right of appeal." See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). On August 23, 2005, this Court notified appellant's counsel of the trial court's certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel's findings as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the existence of any amended certification. On December 2, 2005, counsel filed an amended letter brief with this Court. Counsel's response does not establish (1) that the certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect, or (2) that appellant otherwise has a right to appeal. Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that a defendant may appeal only matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial court's permission to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Counsel's response references neither of these exceptions, and there is nothing in the record currently before the Court to support a finding that appellant filed written pre-trial motions that were ruled on before trial or that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Accordingly, the trial court's certification is supported by the documents currently before the Court. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614-15 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court's certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(d); see Tex.R.App.P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action. Chavez v. State, Nos. PD-1381-04 and PD-1382-04, 2006 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 120, at *9-*10 (Tex.Crim.App. Jan. 25, 2006). This is so regardless of the basis for the appeal. See id. Under these circumstances, no inquiry into even possibly meritorious claims may be made. Id. Here, appellant had no right of 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, this appeal is dismissed. All pending motions are denied as moot.