Mark Anthony Guajardo v. State ( 2015 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-15-00626-CR
Mark Anthony GUAJARDO,
Appellant
v.
The STATE
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2013CR7064
Honorable Ray Olivarri, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 9, 2015
DISMISSED
Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Marc Anthony Guajardo pled guilty to aggravated
sexual assault of a child and was sentenced to thirty years and a fine of $1500 in accordance with
the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On September 1, 2015, the trial court signed a certification
of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO
right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Guajardo filed a notice of appeal, the trial
court clerk sent copies of the certification and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The
 04-15-00626-CR
clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id.
25.2(d).
“In a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised
by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to
appeal.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes the
punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor
and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed
and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal.
See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-
bargain case and that Guajardo does not have a right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a
certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.”
Id. 25.2(d).
We, therefore, informed Guajardo that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), unless an amended trial court certification showing that he
had the right to appeal was made part of the appellate record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1;
Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial
court certification has been filed. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).
PER CURIAM
Do not publish
-2-