Randy Wayne Sprinkle v. State ( 2020 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-20-00011-CR
No. 02-20-00012-CR
___________________________
RANDY WAYNE SPRINKLE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 396th District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 1592568D, 1595504R
Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Randy Wayne Sprinkle attempts to appeal his convictions and sentences for
exploitation of a child, or elderly or disabled person, and theft after pleading guilty to
both offenses pursuant to a charge bargain. See Harper v. State, 567 S.W.3d 450, 455
(Tex. App.––Fort Worth 2019, no pet.) (defining charge bargain). Under that bargain,
the State agreed to dismiss four other pending charges and to discontinue
investigating other offenses Sprinkle may have committed that were then pending
before a Tarrant County grand jury.
This bargain is reflected in the trial court’s certifications of Sprinkle’s right of
appeal, which show that each case is a plea-bargain case for which Sprinkle has no
right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d)–(e). Although we gave Sprinkle and
his counsel the opportunity to show why this court has jurisdiction over the appeals,
neither of them has responded to our inquiry letters. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.3.
Therefore, we dismiss both of Sprinkle’s appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2),
43.2(f); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: April 2, 2020
2