Michael Patrick Iorio v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 379th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Annotate this Case

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

No. 04-07-00447-CR

 

Michael Patrick IORIO,

Appellant

 

v.

 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

 

From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-CR-3333

Honorable Bert Richardson, Judge Presiding

 

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 29, 2007

 

DISMISSED

 

Defendant Michael Iorio pled guilty to indecency with a child, and was sentenced within the terms of a plea bargain. Defendant timely filed a general notice of appeal. The trial court's Certification of Defendant's Right of Appeal states this "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk's record contains a written plea bargain and a written waiver of appeal, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by defendant; therefore, the trial court's certification accurately reflects that defendant waived his right to appeal and that defendant's case is a plea bargain case and defendant does not have a right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

Rule 25.2(d) provides, "The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules." Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, on July 10, 2007, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification that shows appellant has the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record. See Daniels v. State,110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 2003, order); Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); 37.1. No amended trial court certification has been filed; therefore, this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

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.