Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-13-00199-CR
Jorge MARTINEZ,
Appellant
v.
The State of Tex
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2013CR1083
Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 22, 2013
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Jorge Martinez pled nolo contendere to driving
while intoxicated, a third degree felony. In accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain
agreement, Martinez was sentenced to three years in prison. On February 28, 2013, 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 Martinez filed a
notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this
04-13-00199-CR
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 Martinez
permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately
reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Martinez 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 Martinez that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that
Martinez 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. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed pursuant to
Rule 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM
Do not publish
-2-