Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 1, 2022

No. 04-22-00384-CR

Jose Andres ROMERO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

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

Trial Court No. 7972

Honorable Albert D. Pattillo, III, Judge Presiding

ORDER

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). 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.” Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

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 the clerk’s record 

to determine 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, because the 

clerk’s record does not establish that the punishment assessed by the trial court does not exceed 

the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant, we ordered the 

court reporter to file the reporter’s record of any hearings related to appellant’s guilty plea. The 

reporter’s record, which was filed on August 29, 2022, shows that appellant agreed to plead 

guilty in exchange for the State’s agreement to: (1) waive two enhancement allegations; and (2) 

recommend that appellant’s sentences run concurrently rather than consecutively. The reporter’s 

record further shows that the trial court confirmed with appellant and his appointed counsel that 

these provisions were part of the plea agreement. Finally, the reporter’s record shows that 
appellant stated that he understood that he was waiving his right to appeal as part of the plea 

agreement.

Based on these facts, the reporter’s record appears to support the trial court’s certification 

that appellant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); Harper v. State, 567 S.W.3d 

450, 454–55 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2019, no pet.) (holding that Rule 25.2 applies to plea 

agreements “[w]here a charge bargain effectively caps the maximum punishment”). Accordingly, 

appellant is given notice that this appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure unless an amended certification showing that appellant has the 

right to appeal is made part of the appellate record by October 3, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P.

25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on 

merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. ref’d) (not designated for 

publication).

We ORDER all appellate deadlines are suspended until further order of the court. We 

further ORDER the clerk of this court to serve copies of this order on the attorneys of record and 

the court reporter. 

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

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

court on this 1st day of September, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court