Opinion issued March 8, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 1 8 - 00 074 - C R NO. 01 - 18 - 00075 - CR

——————————— CARLOS MA CI A S , Appellant

V . THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 176th District C ourt

H a rri s County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 1486865 & 1486866
MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Carlos Macias , was indicted for the first

- degree felony offense of super - aggravated sexual assault of a child under six years of age in the underlying trial court cause number 1486865, which carried a minimum prison term of twenty

-2

five years. 1 Appellant was separ a tely indicted for the first

- degree felony offense of cont inuous sexual abuse of a child, involving a different child, in the related trial court cause number 1486866 , which also carried a minimum prison term of twenty

five years. 2 The State agreed to reduce the charges in both cases to the first

- degree felony o ffenses of aggravated sexual assault of a child under fourteen years of age, with an agreed punishment recommendation of twenty years’ confinement in each
case. 3 Appellant pleaded guilty to the reduce d first

- degree felony offenses of aggravated sexual ass ault of a child under fourteen years of age with the agreed twenty
- year confinement recommendation in each case
. In accordance with his plea bargain s with the State, t he trial court found appellant guilty and a s s e ss ed his punishment at twenty year s’ confi ne ment in each of the trial court cause numbers 1486865 and 1486855, with the sentences to run concurrently
. 4 The trial court certified that th e s e w ere plea

- bargain ed case s and that appellant had no right of appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)(2) . Appellant timely

1 See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 22.021(a)(1)(B)(iii), (e), (f)(1) (West 201 1 )
. 2 See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 21.021(b), (c)(2), (4), (h) (West 201 1 )
. 3 See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § § 22.011(c) (1) , 22.021(a)(1)(B)(iii), (b)(1), (e) (West 201 1 )
. 4 See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . § 12. 3 2 (a) (West 20 1 1 ).3

filed a pro se notice of appeal and the trial court appointed counsel in each case. See id. 26.2(a)(1). We dismiss th e s e appeal s for want of jurisdiction. In a plea

- bargain case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were
ra ised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal. T EX . C ODE C RIM . P ROC . A NN . art. 44.02 (West 2017 ); T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has not been m ade part of the record. T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(d); see Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
. Here, the trial court’s certification s , included in the clerk’s record in each case , stated t hat these were plea

- bargained cases and that appellant had no right of appeal, and the trial court did not give its permission to appeal any matters. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 25.2(a)(2), (d); Dears , 154 S.W.3d at 615. The clerk’s record s in each case , includ ing the plea waivers and plea terms, confirm that appellant pleaded guilty to the reduced first

- degree felony offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child under fourteen years of age in exchange for the State’s reduction of the original charges and the twenty
- year punishment recommendations
. T hus, the records supp ort the trial court’s certification s . See Dears , 154 S.W.3d at 615; Shankle v. State , 119 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (noting that a greement to plead guilty in exchange for State’s reduction of charge is plea bargain under Rule 25.2(a)(2) )
. Because appellant has no right of appeal, we4

must dismiss th e s e appeal s . See Chavez v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascert ain whether an appellant who plea

- bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”)
. Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 43.2(f). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Higley
. Do not publish. T EX . R. A PP . P. 47.2( b).