i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-09-00259-CR
James Arthur ANTHONY,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2007-CR-2235
Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 8, 2009
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, James Arthur Anthony pled nolo contendere to
aggravated sexual assault and true to an enhancement offense and was sentenced to forty years
imprisonment in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On April 1, 2009, the trial
court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and
04-09-00259-CR
the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX . R. APP . P. 25.2(a)(2). After Anthony filed a notice
of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See
id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been
filed. See id. 25.2(d).
“In a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by
written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to
appeal.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not
exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Anthony. See id. The
clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate
that the trial court gave Anthony permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification,
therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Anthony does not have
a right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right
of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d).
We, therefore, warned Anthony that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule
of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that Anthony
had the right to appeal was made part of the appellate record. See TEX . R. APP . P. 25.2(d), 37.1;
Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 176 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended
trial court certification has been filed. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-