Manuel Fernandez v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 372nd District Court of Tarrant County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2-09-198-CR MANUEL FERNANDEZ APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ------------ FROM THE 372ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 -----------On May 26, 2009, Appellant Manuel Fernandez was convicted of burglary of a habitation, a second-degree felony, after pleading guilty to the offense and pleading true to the enhancement paragraph. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(a), (c)(2) (Vernon 2008). Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced him to ten years confinement, with the sentence to run concurrently 1 ¦ See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. with any sentence currently being served, 2 and entered its certification of Fernandez s right to appeal in accordance with rule 25.2(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The certification states that the case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal. On June 10, 2009, this court notified Fernandez that the certification indicating that he had no right to appeal had been filed in this court and that this appeal would be dismissed unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal on or before June 22, 2009. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 44.3. On June 15, 2009, we received a pro se response from Fernandez that does not show any grounds for continuing the appeal. Therefore, in accordance with the trial court s certification, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), 43.2(f); Cooper v. State, 45 2 ¦ The punishment range for a second-degree felony is imprisonment for any term of not more than twenty years or less than two years and up to a $10,000 fine. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.33 (Vernon 2003). The written plea admonishments indicate that the State offered Fernandez ten years confinement, to run concurrently with other cases being served. 2 S.W.3d 77, 81 82 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); see also Griffin v. State, 145 S.W .3d 645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (stating that rule 25.2(a)(2) s requirements do not impermissibly abridge the right to appeal). PER CURIAM PANEL: MCCOY, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and MEIER, J. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: July 16, 2009 3
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.
