Court Opinion

ID: 9906438
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-02 07:09:52.71163+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:23.076239
License: Public Domain

Opinion filed November 30, 2023

                                     In The

        Eleventh Court of Appeals
                                  ___________

                              No. 11-23-00241-CR
                                  ___________

                        KRISTEN LOPEZ, Appellant
                                        V.
                    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                    On Appeal from the 350th District Court
                            Taylor County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. 14497-D

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
      Appellant, Kristen Lopez, originally pleaded guilty to the third-degree felony
offense of possession of methamphetamine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN.
§ 481.115(a), (c) (West Supp. 2023). The trial court deferred the adjudication of
Appellant’s guilt and placed her on community supervision for six years. The State
subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate that alleged that Appellant committed
thirteen violations of the conditions of her community supervision. At the hearing
on the motion, Appellant pled true to each of the allegations, and the trial court found
the allegations to be true. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Appellant was
sentenced to imprisonment for four years in the Institutional Division of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice. Thereafter, Appellant filed a pro se notice of
appeal. We dismiss the appeal.
      This court notified Appellant by letter 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); see also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West
2018). We requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue the
appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a response and confirmed that this
is a plea bargain case, and that Appellant waived her right to appeal. Appellant’s
counsel stated that there are no grounds to continue Appellant’s direct appeal.
      Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that, in a plea bargain case in which the punishment
does not exceed the punishment agreed to 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 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 reflect that Appellant entered into a plea
bargain, that her punishment was assessed in accordance with the plea bargain, and
that she waived her right of appeal. 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 judge of the trial court. The documents on file in this court
                                           2
support the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613–14
(Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we must dismiss this appeal without further
action. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2006).
      This appeal is dismissed.

                                               JOHN M. BAILEY
                                               CHIEF 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