Ke n n e d y v . S ta te , 262 S. W
. 3d 454, 457- 58 ( T ex. A pp.
— A us t i n 2008) ( ci t i ng 1 Y o u n gv . S ta te , 8 S
. W
. 3 d 6 5 6 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 )). 

## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS

OF TE XAS N O . P D - 1318- 08
M I C H A EL PA TR I C K K EN N ED Y , A ppe l l ant
v . THE S TA TE OF TE X AS ON APP ELLANT ’ S PET I TI ON FOR DI S CRETI ON ARY REVI EW

FROM THE THI RD CO URT O F AP PEALS

CO M AL CO UNTY K EASLE R , J . , d eli v er ed th e o p inion for a u n a n im o u s C o u rt. O P I N I O N T h e A u stin C o u rt o f

A p p e a ls h e ld th a t M ich a e l P a trick K e n n e d y h a d n o rig h t to ap p ea l th e tri al j u d g e’s d ec isi o n to d e n y p art of h is sup p ression m o ti o n u n d er the stan d ard foropen- pl ea c as es announce d i n Y o u n g v . S ta te . W e c o n c lu d e th a t th is is a c h a rg e -b a rg a in

1
ca se; t h ere fo re, K e n n e d y h a s th e righ t t o ap p ea l un d er T ex as R u le of A p p ell ate P roc ed u reK E N N E D Y —2

1 1 9 S
. W
. 3 d 8 0 8 (T ex . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 3 ). 2 25. 2( a) ( 2) , as i nt erpr et ed i n Sh a n k le v . S ta te . 2 Backg r ound K e n n e d yw a s c h a rg e d w ith att em pted cap ital m u rd e r a n d d e a d lyc o n d u c t. B e f o re trial, K ennedy m oved t o s uppr es s evi dence s ei zed fr om hi s pr oper t y . A ft er hear i ng t es t i m onyand the p arti es’ a rgu m en ts atthe p retri al su p p ression h ea ri n g , the tri al j u d g e g ran ted K en n ed y ’s
m ot i on i n par tand deni ed i ti n par t . I m m edi at el y af ter thi s , K ennedypl ed gui l t yt o t he offe ns e of a ggr avat ed as s aul ton a pea ce of fi cerw i t h a d eadl yw eapon. I n admoni s hi ng K ennedy , t he t r i al j udge sai d, “Thi s i s an open pl ea w i t h no r ecomm endat i on. A nd t he r ange of puni s hm ent i s not m or e t han 99 y ear s orl i fe, norl es s t han fi ve y ear s i n t he I ns t i tut i onal D iv isio n o f

th e T e x a s D e p a rtm e n t o f C rim in a l Ju stic e ; an d in a d d iti o n to th a t, a f in e n o t to
e x c e e d $ 1 0 ,0 0 0 .” T h e trial ju d g e a n d th e p a rties th e n re f e rre d to a p lea a g re e m e n t: THE CO UR T: O kay
. And i s t h a t p ar t of y our agr eement , t hat t her e w as a dea dl yw eapon us ed. A nd couns el have y ou gone overw i t h y our cl i ent t he ef fec tof pl eadi ng t rue t o a dea dl yw eapon? D E F E N S E C O U N S E L : Y e s, Y o u r H o n o r. Y o u r H o n o r, in th a t re g a rd it i s a n o p e n p lea , b u t w e re m in d th e C o u rt p u rsu a n t to o u r a g re e m e n t w ith c o u n se l f o r th e S tate th a t th is i s a cont i ngent pl ea subj ect t o our r i ght t o appea l th e m o tio n – – th e C o u rt’s r u lin g o n o u r m o tio n to supp res s. T H E C O U R T : A nd al s o – – PR O SE C U T O R : I t ’ s under s t ood byt he St at e. T H E C O U R T : A n d i t’ s also u n d erstoo d , at l ea st b y the C o u rt f ro m a n o f

f -th e -re c o rd d isc u ss io n , th a t in exchange f

ort hi s pl ea of

gui l t yand t rue t o aK E N N E D Y —3

I d. at457. 3 deadl yw eapon, t hatt he o the rt w o cas es w i l l be d ism iss e d u p o n p u n ish m e n t; i s th a t co rre c t? P R O S E C U T O R : Y e s , s ir
. D E F E N S E C O U N S E L : T h a t is corr ect . Y ou r H on or, I w ou ld ten d e r to t he C our t at t hi s t i m e t he ce r t i fi cat i on of ourr i ght to a p p e a l f

o r p u rp o s e s o f

th e h e a ri n g . T h e trial ju d g e a c c e p ted K e n n e d y ’s p lea a n d e x p lain e d : Y ou do under s t and t hatexce ptforcert ai n m at t er s , pr etr i al m ot i ons t hathave been f i l ed and rul ed on byt he C our t– – and t o m y know l edge t hat i s j us tt he h e a rin g w e h a v e h a d to d a y . B u t s u b jec t to th a t, y o u h a v e w a iv e d a n ya n d a ll ri g h ts t o ap p ea l, inclu d ing y o u r m o ti o n to b ri n g a m o ti o n fo r a n ew tr ial b ef o re th is C o u rt? K e n n e d y’s d e f

e n se a tto rn e ya c k n o w led g e d th a t K e n n e d yu n d e rsto o d th is a d m o n ish m e n t. T he t r i al j udge t hen ac cept ed K ennedy ’ s gui l t ypl ea, and af t erhol di ng a puni s hm enthear i ng, t he j udge s ent ence d K ennedy t o s eventy - fi ve y ear s ’ confi nement . T he tr i al j udge ce r t i fi ed K enn edy ’s ri gh tt o ap peal, st at i ng t hat this i s a pl ea- bar gai n cas e, butm at t er s w er e r ai s ed byw r i t t en mot i on fi l ed and rul ed on befor e t r i al and not w i t hdr aw n or w ai ved, and t he def endanthas t he r i ghtof appe al [; and] i s a pl ea- bar gai n cas e, but t he t r i al cour t has gi ven perm i s s i on t o appea l , and th e d e f e n d a n t h a s th e ri g h t to a p p e a l.

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls K enn ed y ap p eal ed t he t r i al j udge’ s par t i al deni al of hi s s uppr es s i on m ot i on t o t he A us t i n C ourtof A ppeal s . A l t hough nei t herpar t ym ent i oned w ai ver , t he cour thel d t hat 3 K ennedyw ai ved hi s r i ght to ap p eal hi s fi r s tfourgr ounds of err or , w hi ch cha l l enged theK E N N E D Y —4

I d. at457. 4 I d. at458 ( quot i ng Y

oung , 8 S
. W
. 3 d at 66 6 -67 ). 5 I d. at458- 59. 6 I d. at458. 7 I d. at459- 60. 8 rul i ng on t he mot ion to su p p ress , bypl eadi ng gui l t y . T he courtbegan i t s di s cus s i on by 4
s et t i ng outt he rul e w e es t abl i s hed i n Y o u n gv . S ta te : In o p e n -p le a c a s e s , 5 W het herent er ed w i t h or w i t hout an agr eed r ecomm endat i on of puni s hm entby t he St ate, a v ali d pl ea of gui l t yornol o cont ender e “w ai ves ” orfor fei t s t he r i ghtt o appea l a cl ai m of err oronl yw hen the j udgm ent of gui l t w as r ender ed ind ep en d en t of

, an d is no t sup p o rt ed b y , the e rror. T h e c o u rtthen loo k ed to h o w o ther c o u rt s o f a p p ea ls ha v e interp reted this ho lding
. It 6 concl uded t hat a defe ndant m ay appea l an err oneous rul i ng aft er pl eadi ng gui l t y onl yw hen t her e i s a di r ectnexus bet w een the err or and t he j udgm entof gui l t . T he cour tdet er m i ned 7 t hatt her e w as no di r ectnexus i n t hi s cas e bec aus e: ( 1) none of the evi dence t hat t he j udge
ru led w a s a d m iss ib le e sta b lish e d a n yo f th e e lem e n ts o f th e o f

f e n se th a t K e n n e d yp led g u ilty t o and ( 2) t he j udgm entw as s uppor t ed byot herevi dence
. 8

K ennedy ’ s P et i t i on f

or D i s cre t i onary R evi ew K e n n e d y p e tit io n e d u s fo r dis c re tio n a ry re v iew
. H e c o n ten d s tha t th e c o u rt o f a p p e a ls i mpr o p e r l y e mpl o y e d n o t h i n g mor e t h a n a l e g a l
- s u f f i c i e n c y - o f

- t h e - e v i d e n c e r e v i e w by
nar r ow l yfocus i ng on w het her the el ement s of t he off ens e coul d have be en es t abl i s hed
w i t hout t he evi dence s ought t o be suppr es s ed. H e ar gues t hatt hi s appr oach i s cont r aryt o t heK E N N E D Y —5

1 1 9 S .W .3 d 8 0 8 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 3 ). 9 T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 5 .2 (a )( 2 ) ( V e rn o n S u p p . 2 0 0 9 ). 10 I d. 11 pol i cyand pr ece den t w e reli ed on i n Y oung . T h e S tate c o n c e d e s th a t th e c o u rt o f a p p e a ls
er r ed i n hol di ng t hat K ennedy w ai ved hi s r i ghtt o appea l
. B ot h par t i es as k us t o r emand t he
cas e t o t he cour tof appe al s t o cons i der the m erit s of K ennedy ’ s cl ai m t hatt he t r i al j udge
err ed in den y i ng his m oti on t o sup press . A nal y s i s and R es ol ut i on T h e c o u rt o f

a p p e a ls an d th e p a rties e rre d to ig n o re R u le 2 5 .2 (a )(2 ). B e c a u se th is is
a c h a rg e -b a rg a in c a se , K e n n e d yh a d th e ri g h t to a p p e a l u n d e r T e x a s R u le o f A p p e llate P ro c e d u re 2 5 .2 (a )(2 ), as in ter p re ted in o u r d e c isio n in Sh a n k le v . S ta te . 9 R ule 25. 2(a) (2) go verns t he ri gh tt o ap peal i n n ego t i at ed p l ea cases: I n a pl ea ba r gai n cas e- - t hati s , a cas e i n w hi ch a de fenda nt ’ s pl ea w as gui l t yor nol o cont ender e and the puni s hm entdid not exce ed the puni s hm ent r ecomm ended by t he pros ecut or and agr eed t o by t he def endant
- - a def

endant m a y a p p e a l o n l y: (A ) t h o se m att ers th at w ere raised b yw ri tt en m o ti o n fil ed an d ruled o n b ef o re t r i al , or (B ) a f ter g e tti n g th e trial c o u rt’s p e rm iss io n to a p p e a l. 10 I n Sh a n k le , w e i nt erpr et ed t he meani ng of R ul e 25. 2( a) ( 2) ’ s t ext“punishm ent
r ecomm ended byt he pr os ecut orand agr eed t o byt he defenda nt . ” I n t hatcas e, Shankl e w as
c h a rg e d w ith a g g ra v a ted se x u a l a ss a u lt o f a c h ild a n d b u rg lar y o f a h a b itatio n . T h e S tate 11 fil ed a p lea d iscl o su re in the sex u al assa u ltca se, w h ich s tat ed that, in ex ch an g e fo r S h an k le’sK E N N E D Y —6

I d. 12 I d. 13 Id

. 14 I d. 15 I d. at809- 10. 16 Id

. a t 8 1 0
. 17 Id

. 18 I d. 19 I d. 20 gui l t ypl ea, t he St at e w oul d notpr os ecut e Shankl e fo rbur gl aryof a ha bi t at i on. T he 12 di s cl os ur e al s o s t at ed t hats ent enci ng w oul d be l eftw i t hi n t he di s cr et i on of t he t r i al j udge. 13 Shankl e pl ed gui l t y to ag g rav at ed s exual as s aul tand, att he s ame t i m e, admi t t ed t hathe
comm i t t ed t he bur gl ar yof a habi t at i on offe ns e. T he cas e w as r es etfors ent enci ng. A ft er 14 15 the tri al j u d g e he ard test im o n y at the s en tenc ing h ea ri n g , the ju d g e stated that the b u rglary offe ns e w oul d be t ake n i n t o a c c o u n twhe n a s s es s i ng Shankl e’ s puni s hm entfort he aggr avat ed
se x u a l as sa u lt ca se . T h e trial ju d g e th e n se n ten c e d S h a n k le to f o rtyy e a rs’ im p riso n m e n t. 16 17 Shankl e appe al ed, cont endi ng t hatt he t r i al j udge err ed byfai l i ng t o admoni s h hi m thathe
w o u ld b e re q u ir ed to reg ist er a s a se x o ff en d er. 18 T h e A u stin C o u rt o f

A p p e a ls h e ld th a t S h a n k le’ s n o tice o f a p p e a l in v o k e d its j ur i s di ct i on and t hat t he t r i al j udge’ s fai l ur e t o admoni s h Shankl e aboutr egi s t er i ng as a s ex
o ff en d er w as r ever s i bl e er r or . W e gr ant ed r evi ew of bot h t he cour t ’ s hol di ngs . In 19 20K E N N E D Y —7

Id

. a t 8 1 2
. 21 Id

. at813. 22 Id

. 23 Id

. a t 8 1 4
. 24 r e v i e w i n g t h e c o u r t ’ s f

i r s th o l d i n g u n d e rR u l e 2 5
. 2 ( a ) ( 2 ) , w e m a d e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n q u i r y: “The pr os ecut orand [Shankl e] ent er ed i nt o a pl ea- bar gai n agr eeme n t, b u t w as i tan
a g r e e me n tb ywhi c h t h e p r o s e c u t o rr e c o mme n d e d , a n d [ Sh a n k l e ] a g r e e d t o , ‘ p u n i s h me n t ’ ?” W e he ld that i tw as beca us e “c har ge- bar gai ni ng aff ect s puni s hm ent . ” E xpl ai ni ng t he 21
c o n c e p t o f

c h a rg e -b a rg a in in g , w e sa id th a t it“ in v o lv e s q u e stio n s o f w h e th e r a d e f

e n d a n t w ill pl ead gui l t yt o t he off

ens e t hathas been a l l eged ort o a l es s erorr el at ed off ense, and of
w het her t he pros ecut or w i l l di s m i s s , or r efr ai n fr om br i ngi ng, ot herchar ges . ” C ont i nui ng, 22

w e re c o g n ize d th a t “[ a ]n a g re e m e n t to d ism iss a p e n d in g c h a rg e , o r n o t to b rin g a n a v a ilab le
c h a rg e , ef

f e c tiv e ly p u ts a c a p o n p u n ish m e n t a t th e m a x im u m se n ten c e f o r th e c h a rg e th a t is
n o t dism issed
. ” W e the n h eld th at t h e c o u rt o f a p p ea ls erred w h en itad d resse d S h an k le’s 23
s ex- offe nderadmoni s hm entcompl ai nton appea l beca us e Shankle h ad n o r i ghtt o appea l underR ul e 25. 2( a) ( 2) ; t he for ty y ea rs’ of i m pr i s onm entas s es s ed di d notexce ed t he puni s hm entr ecomm ended byt he pr os ecut orand agr eed t o byShankl e. 24 T h e c o u rto f a p p ea ls an d the p arti es in this c ase inco rrectl yassu m ed that K en n ed y ’s ri g h t t o ap p ea l w as n o t go v ern ed b yR u le 25
. 2 (a)(2), presu m ab lyb ec au se th e p lea p ap ers a re t i t l ed, “open pl ea. ” H ow ever , t he r ecor d i n t hi s cas e s how s t hat t he St at e and K ennedyK E N N E D Y —8

ent er ed i nt o a cha r g e - bar gai n agr eement . T he agr eementpr ovi ded thatK ennedyw oul d pl ead g u il tyto ag g rav ated assa u lto n a p ea ce o ff icer w ith a d ea d lyw ea p o n in e x c h an g e f o r a di s m i s s al of t he at t empt ed capi t al m ur der and deadl yconductchar ges . Sent enci ng w as l eft t o t he di s cr et i on of t he t r i al j udge. A s i n Sh a n k le , the c h a rg e -b a rg a in a g re e m e n t ef f e c tiv e ly cappe d Shankle’s puni s hm entt o t he appl i cabl e puni s hm entr ange f ort he agr eed- upon offe ns e. B efor e t he agr eement , K ennedyw as s u bjectt o t w o s epar at e, addi t i onal puni s hm ent s . T he fi r s t w as for at t empt ed capi t al m ur der , a fi r s t - degr ee fel onyt hatcarr i ed a puni s hm entr ange o f i m pr i s onm entforl i fe orforanyt er m of no m or e t han ni net y - ni ne y ear s orl es s t han fi ve y ear s i n addi t i on t o a fi ne nott o exce ed $10, 000. T he sec ond w as for d ea d lyco n d u ct, a third-d eg ree fe lon yo ff en se th at ca rri ed a p u n ishm en t r an g e o f n o m o re t han t en y ear s orl es s t han t w o y ear s i n addi t i on t o a fi ne nott o exce ed $10, 000. U ndert he pl ea- bar gai n agr eement , K ennedyw as s ubj ect t o a s i ngl e puni s hm entfora fi r s tdegr ee f el ony
o f f e n s e . Th i s i s a s i mi l a r s i tu a t i o n t o t h a t whi c h w e addr es s ed i n Sh a n k le . B e c a u se R u le 2 5
. 2 (a)(2) a p p li es to ch arg e-b arg ain c ase s, K en n ed yh as the ri g h t to a p p ea l th e tri al j u d g e’s ruli n g d en y ing p art of

h is sup p ression m o ti o n . W e re v erse the A u sti n C o u rto f A p p ea ls’ s j udgm entand r emand t hi s cas e t o t hatco ur tt o cons i derK ennedy ’ s poi nt s of err ort hat
conce r n t he t r i al j udge’ s rul i ng on hi s s uppr es s i on m ot i on.

D A T E D E L I V E R E D : O ct ober21, 2009 PU BL I SH