Dismissed, Order issued October^?6/, 1996

S<\(h9

In The UX'1" ^;.. ,?L:

(Unttrt of Appeals c C j

Jiftl); Itsirtrt of Wexaz at lallas l £7—

No. 05-92-00030-CR

NO. 05-92-00031-CR

NO. 05-92-00032-CR

BRANDON DEMETRIUS NASH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

OPINION AND ORDER

Before Chief Justice Thomas and Justices Maloney and Hankinson

Brandon Demetrius Nash appeals his convictions for possession of less than twentyeight grams ofcocaine, aggravated assault, and aggravated robbery. Ineach case, appellant

pleaded guilty as part ofa plea bargain agreement and was placed on deferred adjudication

probation for ten years and fined $750. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to adjudicate

guilt in each case. The trial court revoked appellant's probation and adjudicated him guilty.

In the drug offense, punishment was assessed atten years in prison and a $750 fine; in the

remaining two cases, punishment was assessed atfive years in prison and fines of $300 and
%4{^ fO

$750. Appellant filed notices of appeal in each case.

In his briefs, appellant concedes this Court has no jurisdiction pursuant to rule

40(b)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Rule 40(b)(1) provides:

[I]f the judgment was rendered upon [an appellant's] plea of guilty or nolo

contendere pursuant to Article 1.15, Code of Criminal Procedure, and the

punishment assessed does not exceed the punishment recommended by the

prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant and his attorney, in order to

prosecute an appeal for a nonjurisdictional defect or error that occurred prior

to entry of the plea the notice shall state that the trial court granted

permission to appeal orshall specify thatthose matters were raised by written

motion and ruled on before trial.

Tex. R. App. P. 40(b)(1). A general notice of appeal does not confer jurisdiction upon this

Court to consider nonjurisdictional issues. Lyon v. State, 872 S.W.2d 732, 736 (Tex. Crim.

App.), cert, denied, 114. S. Ct. 2684 (1994). Rule 40(b)(1) applies to cases in which

appellant is placed on deferred adjudication probation pursuant to a plea agreement and

the probation is subsequently revoked and appellant adjudicated guilty. Watson v. State, 924

S.W.2d 711, 714-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). The fact that the term of confinement

imposed following adjudication of guilt was not recommended by the State does not amount

toa refusal ofthe trial court toimplement the plea bargain agreement. Watson, 924 S.W.2d

at 714.

In these cases, appellant entered his original pleas pursuant to negotiated plea

bargains. The punishment assessed by the trial court did not exceed that agreed to by

appellant and her attorney and recommended by the State. Further, appellant filed only

-2-
Ml*

general notices of appeal. According to appellant's brief filed by retained counsel, Ross

Teter, appellant was admonished in writing and by the Court in substantial compliance with

article 26.13 of the code of criminal procedure. Additionally, the brief asserts that the

record does not reflect that the plea was involuntary. Appellant has brought no points of

error raising jurisdictional defects. Because appellant filed general notices of appeal, this

Court does not have jurisdiction over these appeals.

Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish

Tex. R. App. P. 90

/sJZsiaA^ <s). 9^4^^

DEBORAH G. HANKINSON

JUSTICE

-3-

j