Issac Joseph Pantoja v. The State of Texas Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 3 of Tarrant County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-17-00308-CR NO. 02-17-00309-CR ISSAC JOSEPH PANTOJA APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 3 OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NOS. 1473898D, 1511029D ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ---------On September 12, 2017, as part of two plea-bargain agreements, appellant Issac Joseph Pantoja pleaded guilty to (1) the state-jail-felony offense of theft of property valued at less than $2,500 with two prior theft convictions and (2) the third-degree-felony offense of failure to comply with sexual-offenderregistration requirements. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(a), (e)(4)(D) (West 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. Supp. 2016); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 62.102(a), (b)(2) (West Supp. 2016). As part of his guilty-plea waivers, Appellant waived “any and all rights of appeal in this case.” In accordance with the agreements, the trial court sentenced Appellant to six months’ confinement and two years’ confinement, respectively, to run concurrently. The trial court certified that Appellant had no right to appeal because the imposed sentences did not exceed the punishments recommended in the plea-bargain agreements and because Appellant had affirmatively waived his right to appeal as part of his guilty pleas. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.14(a) (West 2005). On September 29, Appellant filed pro se notices of appeal in the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b), 26.2(a). On October 5, we notified Appellant’s court-appointed trial counsel that Appellant had filed pro se notices of appeal, that the trial court had certified that Appellant had no right to appeal and had waived his right to appeal, and that we would dismiss the appeal unless Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal no later than October 16. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. We received no response. The record before this court does not show that Appellant’s sentences exceeded the State’s recommendations, that Appellant desires to appeal a matter that was raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or that the trial court granted Appellant permission to appeal. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02; Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Thus, in accordance with the trial 2 court’s certifications and Appellant’s waivers of his right to appeal, we dismiss the appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). /s/ Lee Gabriel LEE GABRIEL JUSTICE PANEL: GABRIEL, KERR, and PITTMAN, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: October 26, 2017 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.
