DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 1, 2021 

# S

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00339-CR GARY DON JENNINGS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TE XAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F20-00545-P MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Schenck Gary Don Jennings appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated, third offense. After he pleaded guilty to th e offense and true to the enhancement paragraph, the trial court found appellant guilty and the enhancement paragraph true, and sentenced him to ten years in prison, pr obated for six years. The trial court then certified this was a plea-bargain case and a ppellant had no right of appeal. Appellant filed a motion for new trial and a notice of appeal. After reviewing the notice of appeal and documents filed along with the notice, the Court sent the parties a letter, questioning the Court’s jurisdiction over the appeal. Appellate counsel responded, stating appellant had “no dispute regarding–2– how the trial court’s certification indicates that the case is a plea bargain case and that Appellant ‘has NO right to appeal.’” The State also filed a response, agreeing that appellant waived his right to appeal. Rule 25.2 governs the perfecti on of appeals in criminal cases and requires that the trial court certify an appe llant’s right to appeal. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(a)(2). Rule 25.2 also requires the recitations in a cer tification to be true and supported by the record. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex . Crim. App. 2005) (certification not supported by record is defective); Carender v. State , 155 S.W.3d 929, 930–31 (Tex. App.—D allas 2005, no pet.); Waters v. State , 124 S.W.3d 825, 826 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. ref’d). There are two basic kinds of plea bargai ns that affect punishment: (1) sentence bargaining and (2) charge bargaining. See Shankle v. State , 119 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Se ntence bargaining may be for binding or nonbinding recommendations to the court on sent ences, including a recommended “cap” on sentences or recommendation for probation. Id . Sentence bargaining affects punishment and constitutes a plea bargain agreement under appe llate rule 25.2. Id

. In this case, appellant signed a writte n plea bargain agreement in which the State agreed to a term of ten years, proba ted for six years in exchange for, among other things, appellant pleading guilty and waiving his right to appeal. The plea bargain agreement is signed by appellant, his appointed counsel, the representative for the State, and the trial court. The tria l court followed the pl ea bargain agreement–3– and sentenced appellant to te n years in prison, probated fo r six years. The trial court certification reflects the terms of the plea bargain agreement by stating appellant waived his right to appeal. Under these circumstances, we have no ot her alternative than to dismiss this appeal.

Do Not Publish T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b) 210339F.U05 /David J. Schenck / DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE–4– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT GARY DON JENNINGS, Appellant

No. 05-21-00339-CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F20-00545-P. Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck. Justices Reichek and Carlyle participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.
Judgment entered July 1, 2021