Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-15-00452-CR
Dimetric Dashon GONZALEZ,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2014CR9594
Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: September 30, 2015
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Appellant Dimetric Dashon Gonzalez pled guilty to
Assault-Family-2nd Offense (Repeater) and was sentenced to eight years imprisonment and a fine
of $2,000 in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On June 25, 2015, the trial
court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case,
and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Gonzalez filed a
pro se notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to
04-15-00452-CR
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, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes the
punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor
and agreed to by the defendant. 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 its permission to appeal.
See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-
bargain case and that Gonzalez 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 Gonzalez that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that he
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 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial
court certification has been filed. Instead, Gonzalez’s appointed counsel filed a letter concluding
that Gonzalez does not have a right to appeal in this case.
This appeal is, therefore, dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM
Do not publish
-2-