Amber Rose Edmonds v. The State of Texas Appeal from 264th District Court of Bell County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-21-00082-CR AMBER ROSE EDMONDS, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 264th District Court Bell County, Texas Trial Court No. 83002, Honorable Paul L. LePak, Presiding June 22, 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. Appellant Amber Rose Edmonds, proceeding pro se, was convicted of possession of a controlled substance,1 enhanced, and sentenced to five years’ confinement.2 The trial court’s certification of Appellant’s right of appeal reflects that this is a plea bargain case from which Appellant has no right of appeal and that Appellant has waived the right 1 2 See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(b) (West 2017). Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (West 2013). of appeal. The certification comports with the record before the Court. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Notwithstanding the certification, Appellant filed a notice of appeal challenging her conviction. We are required by Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) to dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” By letter of May 7, 2021, we notified Appellant of the consequences of the trial court’s certification and directed her to file a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal. By letter filed on May 28, 2021, Appellant notified the Court that she no longer seeks to appeal her conviction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal based on the trial court’s certification and Appellant’s request to dismiss. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 42.2(a). Per Curiam Do not publish. 2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.