Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-12-00791-CR
Samuel Seferino SANCHEZ,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2012CR8165W
Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: February 6, 2013
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Samuel Seferino Sanchez pled nolo contendere to
burglary of a habitation and was sentenced to four years imprisonment in accordance with the
terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On November 5, 2012, 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 Sanchez 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
04-12-00791-CR
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 Sanchez
permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately
reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Sanchez 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 Sanchez that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that
Sanchez 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-