Gregory James Williams, A/K/A James Gregory Thomas v. State

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-01-473 CR

____________________

GREGORY JAMES WILLIAMS a/k/a JAMES GREGORY THOMAS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 83009

---

O P I N I O N

Gregory James Williams, also known as James Gregory Thomas ("Williams"), pleaded no contest to the felony offense of aggravated robbery. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 29.03 (Vernon 1994). In accordance with a plea bargain agreement between Williams and the State, ⁽¹⁾ the trial court sentenced Williams to thirty-five years of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. The trial court did not grant permission for Williams to appeal.

Williams, acting pro se, filed a general notice of appeal that fails to comply with the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3). ⁽²⁾ After appeal was perfected, Williams's appellate counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 493 (1967) and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The brief concluded there was no arguable error to support an appeal.

Williams then filed a pro se brief raising three issues. He contends: (1) he was incompetent to stand trial; (2) his plea was involuntary; and (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel.

The State maintains that we lack jurisdiction because Williams failed to comply with Rule 25.2(b)(3). We agree. The general notice of appeal filed by Williams failed to

invoke our appellate jurisdiction. See White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428-29 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).

We have reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Williams raises no issues over which we have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on August 13, 2002

Opinion Delivered August 28, 2002

Do not publish

Before Walker, C.J., Burgess, and Gaultney, JJ.

1. The "Agreed Punishment Recommendation" limited the upper range of punishment to thirty-five years and also involved the dismissal of an additional case. These circumstances establish the existence of a plea bargain agreement as to the punishment to be assessed by the trial court. See Delatorre v. State, 957 S.W.2d 145 (Tex. App.--Austin 1997, pet. ref'd).

2.

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(b)(3) requires a notice of appeal in a plea bargain context to state expressly that (1) the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect, (2) the substance of the appeal was raised in writing and ruled on before trial, or (3) the trial court granted permission to appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3).