Opinion issued February 5, 2015.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-14-00510-CR
———————————
ROYLAND TREMAINE JONES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 185th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1286315
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Royland Tremaine Jones, without an agreed punishment
recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of burglary of
a habitation with intent to commit theft.1 The trial court deferred a finding of guilt
and placed appellant on community supervision for four years. After the State
moved to adjudicate appellant’s guilt, he pleaded true to the State’s allegations in
the State’s motion and executed a waiver of his right to appeal in exchange for the
State’s recommendation that his punishment be assessed at confinement for four
years with a fine of $100.00. The trial court found appellant guilty and assessed his
punishment in accordance with the State’s recommendation.
We dismiss the appeal. An appeal must be dismissed if a certification
showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the
record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2005). The trial court’s certification, which is included in the record, states
that appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a).
A valid waiver of appeal prevents a defendant from appealing without the
trial court’s consent. Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 622 (Tex. Crim. App.
2003). The record reflects that appellant swore to a stipulation of evidence and
judicial confession, pleading “true” to the allegations in the State’s motion to
adjudicate his guilt. The document contains an agreement that the State would
recommend adjudication of appellant’s guilt, and punishment of confinement for
four years with a fine of $100.00. The document also includes a “Waiver of
1
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 30.02(a)(1) (West 2011).
2
Appeal,” in which appellant states that, “As part of my agreement with the
prosecutor to plead true, I AGREE TO WAIVE any right to appeal I may have
concerning any issue or claim in this case, including my plea or [sic] true or
admission of guilt.” And appellant separately initialed the waiver of appeal. The
trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant’s guilt, and assessed
punishment in accordance with the State’s recommendation.
When a defendant waives his right of appeal in exchange for consideration
from the State, his waiver is made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily, and he
may not appeal any matters unless the trial court first grants permission. See Ex
parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694, 697–99 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (holding
defendant may knowingly and intelligently waive appeal without sentencing
agreement when consideration given by State for waiver). The record shows that
appellant waived his right to appeal as partial consideration, along with his plea of
true, for the State’s recommendation on punishment and that the trial court did not
give its permission to appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Menefee v.
State, 287 S.W.3d 9, 12 n.12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 613.
We dismiss all pending motions as moot.
3
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Massengale, and Lloyd.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4