Opinion issued July 6, 2007
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
___________
NOS. 01-07-00511-CR
01-07-00512-CR
____________
CHRISTOPHER HERNANDEZ, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 180th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1105490
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Christopher Hernandez, pleaded guilty to the offenses of evading arrest with a motor vehicle and aggravated assualt of a family member. In accordance with his plea bargain agreements with the State, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt in each case and placed appellant on community supervision for three years.
The State subsequently filed motions to adjudicate guilt in each case to which appellant pleaded true. Contemporaneously with his pleas of true, appellant, appellant's counsel, and the prosecutor signed a document in each case styled "stipulation of evidence" that included a judicial confession, waiver of constitutional rights, and waiver of appeal. The stipulation included among others, the following statements:
I judicially confess that it is true that I violated the terms and conditions of my probation and that the allegations in the attached State's motion are true.
I intend to enter a plea of true to the State's motion.
I understand that the prosecutor will recommend that I be adjudicated guilty in this cause and my punishment should be set at three years Texas Department of Criminal Justice and I agree to that recommendation.
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 of true or admission of guilt.
Appellant wrote his initials beside each of the statements. After a hearing, the trial court found to be true in each case the State's allegation that appellant had violated the conditions of his community supervision, and found appellant guilty of the original charges of evading arrest with a motor vehicle and aggravated assualt of a family member. The trial court sentenced him to confinement for three years in each case. Despite having waived the right to appeal, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal in each case.
There is nothing in the record indicating that appellant's waiver of his right to appeal in each case was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made. There is also nothing indicating that the trial court gave its consent for an appeal in either case. In fact, the contrary is true. The trial court's judgment in each case is stamped, "Appeal waived. No permission to appeal granted."
A valid waiver of the right to appeal will prevent a defendant from appealing without the consent of the trial court. Willis v. State, 121 S.W.3d 400, 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). The record indicates that appellant's waiver of his right to appeal was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made.
Because the record in this case reflects that appellant's waiver of the right to appeal in cause number 1105490 and cause number 1105489 were valid and that the trial court did not consent to an appeal in either case, we dismiss the appeals in cause number 1105490 and in cause number 1105489.
We dismiss any pending motions as moot.PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Taft, Jennings, and Alcala.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).