Opinion issued January 7, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00910-CR

———————————

DREW PATTERSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 228th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1396819

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Drew Patterson, pleaded guilty to the offense of failure to stop and 

render aid on February 28, 2014, with the agreed recommendation that he be placed 

on deferred adjudication community supervision for two years. See TEX. TRANSP.

CODE ANN. §§ 550.021(a), (c) (West Supp. 2015). On February 28, 2014, the trial 
2

court placed appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for two 

years, in accordance with the terms of his plea bargain with the State. See TEX.CODE 

CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12, § 5(a) (West Supp. 2015). The trial court certified that 

this is a plea-bargain case and that appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 25.2(a)(2).

Appellant prematurely filed a pro se notice of appeal on January 13, 2014, 

which is deemed timely filed on February 28, 2014, the date the order of deferred 

adjudication states that the sentence of two years’ deferred adjudication community 

supervision was imposed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.1(b).1 Appellant’s form notice of 

appeal acknowledges that his punishment did not exceed the amount recommended 

by the State and agreed to by appellant. However, appellant’s notice of appeal

contends that his guilty plea does not preclude appealing any rulings on pretrial 

motions. Appellant also filed a “Motion for Hybrid Representation and a PostJudgment Motion” and a letter-motion for an extension of time to pay for the record 

in this Court. We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has 

the right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see

 

1 The trial clerk filed a Certificate of Failure to File Mark, dated October 19, 2015, in 

this Court, explaining that the notice of appeal was not properly file marked at the 

time it was received by the trial clerk and it would have been file marked on January 

13, 2014, had it been file marked timely.
3

Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The trial court’s 

certification of appellant’s right of appeal, which is attached to the notice of appeal, 

states that this is a plea-bargain case and that appellant has no right of appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

In a plea-bargain case, where a defendant pleaded guilty and the punishment 

did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the 

defendant, as here, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were raised by 

written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial court’s 

permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West Supp. 2015); 

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). However, the trial court’s certification states that this is 

a plea-bargain case and that appellant has no right of appeal, and the trial court did 

not give its permission to appeal on any matters, including any rulings on pretrial 

motions. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2); Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 615.

Because appellant has no right of appeal in this plea-bargain case, we must 

dismiss this appeal without further action. See Menefee v. State, 287 S.W.3d 9, 12 

n.12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an 

appellant who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a), must dismiss a 

prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”); see 

also Greenwell v. Court of Appeals for Thirteenth Judicial Dist., 159 S.W.3d 645, 
4

649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining purpose of certification requirements is to 

resolve cases that have no right of appeal quickly without expense of appointing 

appellate counsel, preparing reporter’s record or preparing appellate brief).

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX.R. APP.

P. 43.2(f). We dismiss all pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Bland.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).