Court Opinion

ID: 9906440
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-02 07:09:54.128516+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:23.494188
License: Public Domain

Opinion filed November 30, 2023

                                      In The

        Eleventh Court of Appeals
                                   ___________

                              No. 11-23-00198-CR
                                   ___________

                    DANIELLE CAUDILLO, Appellant
                                        V.
                    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                    On Appeal from the 42nd District Court
                            Taylor County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. 29549A

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
      Appellant, Danielle Caudillo, pleaded guilty to the third-degree felony offense
of driving while intoxicated. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.09(b) (West Supp.
2023). Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement between Appellant and the State, the
trial court sentenced Appellant to ten years’ imprisonment in the Institutional
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, suspended that sentence, and
placed Appellant on community supervision for ten years. Appellant filed an
untimely notice of appeal challenging the sentence she received based on the plea
agreement. We dismiss the appeal.
      We notified Appellant by letter that her pro se notice of appeal appeared to be
untimely, and that the trial court had certified that this is a plea bargain case in which
Appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 26.2(a); see
also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2018). In our letter, we
requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue the appeal.
Appellant’s counsel filed a response that confirms that this is a plea bargain case and
that there are no grounds to continue the appeal. Appellant’s counsel also filed a
motion to withdraw in this court and in the trial court.
      Pursuant to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal must
be filed either (1) within thirty days after the date that sentence is imposed in open
court or (2) if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial, within ninety days
after the date that sentence is imposed in open court. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). A
notice of appeal must be in writing and filed with the clerk of the trial court. TEX. R.
APP. P. 25.2(c)(1). Appellant did not file a motion for new trial and Appellant filed
her pro se notice of appeal more than thirty days after her sentence was imposed in
open court. The notice of appeal was therefore untimely. Absent a timely filed
notice of appeal or the granting of a timely motion for extension of time, we do not
have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522–23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996);
Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108, 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).
      Furthermore, Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that, in a plea bargain case in which
the punishment imposed does not exceed the punishment agreed to by the parties in
the plea bargain, “a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised
by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s
permission to appeal, or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by
statute.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Subsections (A), (B), and (C) are not applicable
here. We note that Rule 25.2 does not permit a plea-bargaining defendant to appeal
                                            2
matters related to the voluntariness of the plea bargain unless the defendant has
obtained the trial court’s permission to appeal. See Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77,
83 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Carender v. State, 155 S.W.3d 929, 931 (Tex. App.—
Dallas 2005, no pet.).
      The documents on file in this appeal show that Appellant entered into a plea
bargain, that her punishment was assessed by the trial court in accordance with the
plea bargain, and that she waived her right of appeal. Further, the trial court certified
that Appellant has no right of appeal. The trial court’s certification was signed by
Appellant, Appellant’s trial counsel, and the presiding judge of the trial court. The
documents on file in this court support the trial court’s certification. See Dears v.
State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
      Thus, even if Appellant had timely perfected an appeal, the appeal would have
been prohibited by Rule 25.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, which
provides that an appellate court must dismiss an appeal without further action when
there is no certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal. TEX. R.
APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); see
Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
      We grant the motion to withdraw filed in this court and dismiss the appeal.

                                               W. STACY TROTTER
                                               JUSTICE

November 30, 2023
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

                                           3