Douglas James Davis v. The State of Texas Appeal from 399th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00714-CR Douglas James DAVIS, Appellant v. The STATE of TexasAppellee The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014CR6254 Honorable Ray Olivarri, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: November 12, 2014 DISMISSED The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that the case is a “plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “[t]he appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). On October 24, 2014, we ordered that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that the appellant has the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record by November 21, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; 04-14-00714-CR see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). Appellant’s counsel has filed written notice with this court that counsel has reviewed the record and “can find no right of appeal for Appellant.” We construe this notice as an indication that appellant will not seek to file an amended trial court certification showing that he has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). In light of the record presented, we agree with appellant’s counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-

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.