Leonardo Molina v. the State of Texas ( 2021 )

NUMBER 13-21-00225-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
LEONARDO MOLINA, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the 445th District Court
of Cameron County, Texas.
ORDER
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Silva
Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Leonardo Molina, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his
conviction in trial court cause number 2020-DCR-2011. The trial court’s certification of
the defendant’s right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
provide that an appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that a defendant has
a right of appeal is not made a part of the record. Id. R. 25.2(d); see id. R. 37.1, 44.3,
44.4. The purpose of the certification requirement is to efficiently sort appealable cases
from non-appealable cases so that appealable cases can “move through the system
unhindered while eliminating, at an early stage, the time and expense associated with
non-appealable cases.” Greenwell v. Ct. of Apps. for the Thirteenth Jud. Dist., 159
S.W.3d 645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see Hargesheimer v. State, 182 S.W.3d 906,
912 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
Within thirty days of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel, Edward A.
Stapleton III, is hereby ORDERED to: 1) review the record; 2) determine whether
appellant has a right to appeal; and 3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings
as to whether appellant has a right to appeal and/or advise this Court as to the
existence of any amended certification.
If appellant’s counsel determines that appellant has a right to appeal, counsel is
further ORDERED to file a motion with this Court within thirty days of this notice,
identifying and explaining substantive reasons why appellant has a right to appeal. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4; Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614–15 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005); see also, e.g., Carroll v. State, 119 S.W.3d 838, 841 (Tex. App.—San Antonio
2003, no pet.) (certification form provided in appendix to appellate rules may be
modified to reflect that defendant has right of appeal under circumstances not
addressed by the form). The motion must include an analysis of the applicable case
law, and any factual allegations therein must be true and supported by the record. See
Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614–15; cf. Woods v. State, 108 S.W.3d 314, 316 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2003) (construing former appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) and holding that recitations in
the notice of appeal must be true and supported by the record). Copies of record
2
documents necessary to evaluate the alleged error in the certification affecting
appellant’s right to appeal shall be attached to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1,
10.2.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed on the
27th day of July, 2021.
3