Nhut Tan Pham v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 177th District Court of Harris County

Annotate this Case
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 1, 2007

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 1, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-07-00842-CR

____________

NHUT TAN PHAM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1038462

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N


Appellant entered a guilty plea to the offense of aggravated robbery without an agreed recommendation as to sentencing. The trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for five years. The State subsequently filed a Motion to Adjudicate Guilt. In the Stipulation of Evidence on State=s Motion to Adjudicate Guilt, appellant pled true to the allegations in return for the State=s agreement to recommend punishment be set at fifteen years= incarceration. Appellant signed this plea agreement, which included a specific waiver of his right of appeal if the trial court assessed punishment not exceeding that recommended by the State and agreed to by appellant. The trial court adjudicated appellant=s guilt and sentenced him on August 30, 2007, to confinement for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal.

The trial court entered a certification of the defendant=s right to appeal in which the court certified that the defendant waived the right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court=s certification is included in the record on appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). The record supports the trial court=s certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed November 1, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Fowler, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.