Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 22, 2022

No. 04-22-00378-CR

Jose Andres ROMERO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 7367

Honorable Albert D. Pattillo, III, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court signed a judgment of conviction indicating that appellant Jose Andres 

Romero had pleaded guilty to the charged offense in the underlying case, and appellant filed a 

pro se notice of appeal. The clerk’s record shows the trial court signed a certification stating the 

underlying case “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See Tex. R. 

App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

This court has a duty to examine the record to determine whether the trial court’s 

certification of defendant’s right to appeal is accurate. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614–

15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Generally, this review involves an examination of whether the 

punishment assessed by the trial court exceeds the punishment recommended by the prosecutor 

and agreed to by the defendant. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02; Shankle v. State, 119 

S.W.3d 808, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Here, while the clerk’s record contains a document 

entitled “Defendant’s Plea of Guilt, Waivers, Stipulations of Evidence and Admonishments,” 

neither that document nor any other documents in the clerk’s record specify the punishment 

recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. Additionally, the reporter’s 

record of the hearing or hearings related to appellant’s guilty plea has not been filed. In response 

to our August 9, 2022 order directing appellant to provide written proof that he had requested the 

preparation of the reporter’s record, appellant’s appointed trial counsel filed a letter stating, inter 

alia, that he had not requested the record because “he was neither retained nor appointed to 

represent Appellant” on appeal. We note, however, that the record does not indicate that the trial 

court either granted a motion to withdraw or appointed alternate counsel to represent appellant 

on appeal. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.04(j)(2) (appointed counsel 

FILE COPY
“shall . . . represent the defendant until charges are dismissed, the defendant is acquitted, appeals 

are exhausted, or the attorney is permitted or ordered by the court to withdraw as counsel for the 

defendant after a finding of good cause is entered on the record”).

 In light of the foregoing facts, we:

1. ORDER the District Clerk of Gillespie County to file, by September 1, 2022, a 

supplemental clerk’s record containing either: (a) a written plea bargain agreement or 

other documentation showing the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed 

to by the defendant; or (b) if no such written documentation exists, a letter to that effect;

2. ORDER the court reporter to file, by September 21, 2022, the reporter’s record of any 

hearings related to appellant’s guilty plea; and 

3. ORDER that appellant’s appointed trial counsel, Mr. Kurtis Rudkin, owes a continuing 

duty of representation to appellant unless and until a supplemental clerk’s record 

containing an order allowing Mr. Rudkin to withdraw and appointing alternate appellate 

counsel is filed in this court.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 22nd day of August, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY