Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-15-00470-CR
David A. MEDRANO,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2015CR4205
Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Jason Pulliam, Justice
Delivered and Filed: September 9, 2015
DISMISSED
David A. Medrano entered into a plea bargain with the State, pursuant to which he pleaded
nolo contendere to a felony offense. As part of his plea bargain, Medrano signed a separate
“Waiver of Appeal”. The trial court imposed sentence and signed a certificate stating that this “is
a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and “the defendant has waived the
right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Medrano filed his notice of appeal, the clerk
sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(e). The
04-15-00470-CR
clerk’s record, which includes the plea bargain agreement and the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2)
certification, has been filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
The clerk’s record establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the
punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant and that the trial court
denied permission to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). We have reviewed the clerk’s record,
and the trial court’s certification appears to accurately state that this is a plea bargain case and
Medrano does not have a right to appeal. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005) (holding that court of appeals should review clerk’s record to determine whether trial court’s
certification is accurate). This court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the
defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).
On August 6, 2015, we gave Medrano notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless
written consent to appeal and an amended certification showing he has the right to appeal were
signed by the trial judge and made part of the appellate record by August 27, 2015. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 2003, order),
disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not
designated for publication). Neither written permission to appeal nor an amended certification
showing Medrano has the right to appeal has been filed. We therefore dismiss this appeal.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish
-2-
David A. Medrano v. State
Combined Opinion