COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

ENRIQUE MARTINEZ
, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS
, Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 12

- 00320

- CR

Appeal from the

41 st District Court

of El Paso County , Texas

(TC# 20120D02642 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Enrique Martinez is attempting to appeal his conviction s for violating his

civil

- commitment requirements

. 1 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2) requires that the
trial court enter its certification of a defendant’s right of appeal each time it enters a judgment of
guilt or other appealable order. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(a)(2). The certification should be made a
part of the record when notice of appeal is filed but may be added by timely amendment or
supplementation or by order of this Court. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d). When a trial court’s
certification of right to appeal is not present in the record on ap peal, an appellate court should order

1 Appellant filed his notice of appeal in cause number 20100D00620 on October 31, 201 2

. However, that cause was dismissed on October 30, 2012 and refiled under cause number 20120D02642

. As cause number 20120D02642 is the active case on appeal, this Court’s records have been modified to reflect the appropriate case on appeal.2

the trial court to supplement the trial record with a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal.

See Cortez v. State , 420 S.W.3d 803, 804 (Tex.Crim. App. 2013) . The appeal must be dismissed if

a certification t hat shows the defendant has the right to appeal has not been made a part of the

record under these rules. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d).
By letter dated October 24, 2014 , the C lerk of this Court notified the trial court, Appellant,

the State, and the District Clerk that the notice of appeal and record in this case is defective

because no certification of right to appeal had been made a part of the record in accordance with

Rule 25.2(a)(2) and 25.2(d). The Clerk’s letter advised Appellant of the requirement tha t he
remedy the defect within ten days of the Clerk’s letter
, and directed the District Clerk to file a
supplemental clerk’ s record on or before Nove mber 8, 2014, or the Court would dismiss the appeal

w ithout further written notice.

On November 7, 2014, th e District Clerk informed the Court that a supplemental clerk’s
record could not be delivered to the Court because no certification of defendant’s right to appeal
had been filed on record for the case. Thereafter, personnel in the office of Appellant’s at torney
advised the Court that the certification issue was being addressed. Based on those
communications, the Court did not dismiss the appeal and provided additional time to ensure the
filing of the certification with the District Clerk for inclusion in the recor d on appeal.
On November 24, 2014, the Clerk of the Court again notified Appellant that no
certification of defendant’s right to appeal had been made a part of the record, and noted that the
Court deferred dismissing the case to provide Appellant an opportunity to file the certification.
The letter informed Appellant of the Court’s intent to dismiss the appeal if the certification was not
filed by December 5, 2014. On December 5, 2014, the District Clerk again advised the Court that3

it could not file a supplemental clerk’s record because no certification had been filed of record in

the case.
No certification of Appellant’s right to appeal has been made a part of the record on appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(d).

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice December 19, 2014
Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, J., and Larsen, J. (Senior Judge) Larsen, J. (Senior Judge), sitting by assignment

(Do Not Publis h)