C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Thomas M. Wilson v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 14

- 00550

- CR

Trial court case number: 2013CR8062

Trial court: 186th District Court of Bexar County

A ppellant , Thomas M. Wilson, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The reporter’s record filed in the appeal indicates that the trial court noted

that appellant has “the right to appeal from [its] ruling on [the ] motion to suppress.” Th e trial court’s written certification of appellant’s right of appeal contained in the clerk’s record

, however, indicates that the trial court certified that this “is a plea

- bargain case, but the defendant

has filed a notice of app eal that specifies the appeal [is] for a jurisdictional defect.”

In a plea bargain case, a defendant may appeal only:

(A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or

(B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(a)(2) ; see T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN . art. 44.02 (Vernon 2006)

. The

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that “the legislature did not expressly or even impliedly make an exception for appeals of jurisdictional issues” that do not comport with the excepti ons created by Rule 25.2(a)(2). Griffin v. State , 145 S.W.3d 645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (noting Rule 25.2(a)(2) does n ot include exception for appeal of jurisdictional issues) ; Harris v. State , 149 S.W.3d 285, 288 (Tex. App.

— Hou ston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. ref’d ) (holding defendant could not, without trial court’s permi ssion, rai se jurisdictional defects in appeal from plea

- bargain ed case)

. Here, the trial court, in its written certification, nei ther cert ified that

matters were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, nor granted appellant permission to appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(a)(2) (A), (B)

.
The Texas Rule s of Appellate Procedure require us to dismiss an appeal unless the record contains a written certification showing tha t the appellant has the right of appeal. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P . 25.2(d). The rules also permit a defective certification to be amended and prohibit us from dismissing an appeal based on the lack of a valid certification when we determine t hat the appellant has a right of appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(f), 34.5(c)(2), 37.1, 4 4.4; Dears v. State

, 154 S.W.3d 6 10, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).Accordingly, w e abate the appeal and remand the case to the trial court. We direct the

trial court to prepare and file a certi fication of appellant’s right of appeal that complies with Rul e 25.2. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2, 34.5(c)(2). Generally, the rules require that a defendant sign the trial court’s certification of his right of appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(d) (requiring that certification “be signed by the defendant”). T he rules authorize us, however, for good cause, to “suspend a rule’s operation in a particular case and order a different procedure.” See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P . 2. B ecause appellant has a right of appeal, is represented by an attorney, and has previously signed a certif ication indicating that he has received the notifi cation required by Rule 25.2(d), we find good cause in this case to suspend the requirement of Rule 25.2(d) that appellant sign the amend ed certification of the right of appeal. S ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 2, 25.2 (d).

Accordingly, we order the trial court, without the necessity of a hearing, to execute an amended “Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Righ t o f Appeal. ” This certification ne ed not be signed by appellant.

We order appellant’s attorney

, Case Darwin, to deliver a copy of the cer tification to appellant, via facsimile , mail, or any other method reasonably calculated to provide appellant with a copy. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(d) (requiring copy of certification be given to defendant ).

We further o rder the trial court clerk to file in this Court a supplemental clerk’s record containing the amended certification of appellant’s right of appeal no later than 1 0 days from

the date of this order

. The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and remo ved from this Court’s active

docket. The appeal will be reinstated on t his Court’s active d ocket once a record that complies

with this order has been filed with the Clerk of this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: March 1 7 , 2015