Opinion
No. 05-17-01342-CR
01-23-2018
KEPHREN THOMAS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F17-16908-K
ORDER
This appeal is REINSTATED.
On October 30, 2018, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. On November 22, 2017, appellant filed a pro se docketing statement and a letter requesting appointment of counsel. Because it was unclear who was representing appellant, if anyone, the Court abated this appeal to allow the trial court to determine the status of appellant's representation and appoint new counsel if necessary.
On January 17, 2018, a supplemental clerk's record was filed showing the trial court has appointed Mark Heidenheimer to represent appellant on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk to reflect Mark Heidenheimer as appellant's counsel and to send all future correspondence to Mark Heidenheimer; Mark Heidenheimer, PLLC; 2208 Wisteria Way; McKinney, Texas 75071; telephone: (214) 578-0360; email: mheidenheimerlaw@gmail.com.
In reviewing the clerk's record filed in this appeal, the Court observes that the trial court has entered a certification showing appellant entered into a plea bargain agreement and has no right of appeal. The plea bargain agreement in the record reflects appellant agreed to plead guilty and waive the right to appeal in exchange for a recommended sentence of ten years' imprisonment, probated for ten years, and a $1,000 fine. The judgment entered in this case reflects the trial court assessed the recommended sentence. Because the record reflects appellant entered into a negotiated plea bargain agreement and waived his right to appeal, the Court questions its jurisdiction over the appeal.
To assist the Court in making a threshold determination of its jurisdiction, appellant is DIRECTED to file, by February 5, 2018, a letter brief addressing the jurisdictional issue. The State is DIRECTED to file any response by February 16, 2018. Any party relying upon information not in the record before this Court must obtain a supplemental record containing that information.
After it has reviewed the jurisdictional briefs, the Court will either dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction or else notify the parties by letter that the Court has jurisdiction over the appeal and of any pending deadlines.
/s/ LANA MYERS
JUSTICE