Vera Louise Clerkley v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                           FILE COPY
    CAUSE NO. 12-14-00342-CR
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
    TYLER, TEXAS
    VERA LOUISE CLERKLEY,                         }       APPEALED FROM 3RD
    APPELLANT
    V.                                            }       DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,                           }       ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS
    APPELLEE
    PER CURIAM ORDER ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND
    Appellant, Vera Louise Clerkley, pleaded guilty to felony theft and was placed on
    community supervision for five years. Subsequently, on the State’s motion, the trial court
    revoked Appellant’s community supervision and sentenced her to confinement in a state jail
    facility for one year. She now appeals “from the judgment of conviction and sentence” for the
    revocation of her community supervision. After examining the appellate record, we abate the
    appeal and remand the case for further proceedings. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), 34.5(c)(2),
    37.1; Dears v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 614-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
    The Trial Court’s Certification
    A trial court is required to enter a certification of a defendant’s right of appeal in every
    case in which it renders a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P.
    25.2(a)(2). In this case, the trial court’s certification is dated October 20, 2014, and is signed by
    Appellant’s counsel but not by Appellant. The certification states that this case “is a plea-
    bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and that “the defendant has waived the
    right of appeal.”
    FILE COPY
    The Record
    The clerk’s record includes a document entitled “Felony Agreed Plea Recommendation”
    signed by Appellant and her counsel. The document reflects that it was signed in connection
    with Appellant’s guilty plea to the charged offense–“THEFT PROP>=$1,500<$20K.”                   The
    agreed sentencing recommendation was community supervision “24 months probated for 5
    years.” The document also contains a statement that “DEFENDANT WAIVES ALL RIGHT
    TO APPEAL. The judgment of conviction shows that the trial court sentenced Appellant in
    accordance with the plea agreement, and the trial court certification states that the case “is a plea-
    bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Other documents in the clerk’s record
    indicate that the State filed a motion to revoke Appellant’s community supervision and that the
    trial court granted the motion. The reporter’s record of the revocation proceeding shows that,
    after imposing sentence, the trial court advised Appellant that she had the right to appeal any
    decision the court made and that her counsel would do that for her.
    Applicable Law
    According to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2), a plea bargain case is one in
    which a defendant’s plea was guilty or nolo contendere. However, the clerk’s record shows that
    this is an appeal from a revocation of community supervision. Although the judgment revoking
    Appellant’s community supervision includes a finding that Appellant pleaded “true” to the
    State’s motion to revoke, nothing in the record indicates that this was a negotiated plea.
    Moreover, Rule 25.2(a) does not apply to negotiated pleas in revocation proceedings. See Dears
    v. State, 
    154 S.W.3d 610
    , 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Therefore, because the underlying case
    is a revocation of community supervision, it is not a plea bargain case.
    Furthermore, the “Felony Agreed Plea Recommendation” that contains the purported
    waiver of Appellant’s right to appeal was executed at the time she was placed on community
    supervision. A defendant may appeal her conviction and sentence at the time she is placed on
    community supervision. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12 § 23(b) (West Supp. 2014). A
    defendant also may appeal the revocation of her community supervision if, as here, she is “called
    on” to serve a sentence of confinement or incarceration. See 
    id. Thus, for
    purposes of appeal,
    the revocation is a separate proceeding from the conviction and sentencing. The purported
    waiver signed by Appellant at the time she was placed on community supervision does not
    purport to waive her right to appeal any subsequent revocation. Therefore, the record does not
    reflect that Appellant has waived her right to appeal the revocation of her community supervision
    or the resulting sentence.
    FILE COPY
    Abatement
    Based on our review of the record, it does not appear that this case is a plea bargain case
    or that Appellant waived the right to appeal the revocation of her community supervision or the
    resulting sentence. Consequently, it appears that the trial court’s certification is defective. See
    
    Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614
    (holding that a defective certification includes one that is correct in
    form but, when compared to the record, proves to be inaccurate). Accordingly, we abate the
    appeal and remand the case to the trial court to conduct a hearing, if necessary, to reconsider its
    October 20, 2014 trial court certification.
    We further direct that, after making its determination, the trial court re-certify whether
    Appellant has the right to appeal. The trial court shall cause any hearing to be transcribed, make
    findings of fact and conclusions of law supporting its determination, and issue any orders
    necessary for resolution of the issue. The trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law,
    the re-certification, and any orders it renders shall be included in a supplemental clerk’s record.
    The reporter’s record of any hearing conducted shall be included in a supplemental reporter’s
    record. The trial court shall, within thirty days of the date of this order, cause the clerk of the
    trial court and the court reporter to forward to this Court any supplemental record prepared in
    compliance with this order.
    WITNESS the Honorable James T. Worthen, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals, 12th
    Court of Appeals District of Texas, at Tyler.
    GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF SAID COURT, at my office this the
    18th day of February 2015, A.D.
    CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK
    12TH COURT OF APPEALS
    By: ________________________________
    Katrina McClenny, Chief Deputy Clerk
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-14-00342-CR

Filed Date: 2/18/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/28/2016