Martin, Bunny Ray v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 337th District Court of Harris County

In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-05-00020-CR

______________________________

BUNNY RAY MARTIN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th Judicial District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court No. 998116

Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Ross

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Bunny Ray Martin appeals from his aggravated assault conviction on his plea of guilty under a plea agreement. The trial court set punishment at ten years' imprisonment, in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement. The trial court filed a certification of Martin's right of appeal in accordance with Rule 25.2(a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, stating that this "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

We have jurisdiction to determine whether we have jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Martin entered into a plea agreement that the trial court did not exceed at sentencing. Under Rule 25.2(a)(2), Martin was entitled to appeal only "those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial" or "after getting the trial court's permission to appeal." Neither of those conditions appear, and the trial court certified that Martin has no right of appeal. See Comb v. State, 101 S.W.3d 724, 725 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).

We are also without jurisdiction to consider the voluntariness of Martin's plea. In Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2)(B) restricted a defendant from appealing the voluntariness of his or her plea without the trial court's permission. Id. at 79. The record does not show that Martin has the trial court's permission to appeal the voluntariness of his plea. Consequently, we are without jurisdiction to consider that issue. //

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Donald R. Ross

Justice

Date Submitted: March 2, 2005

Date Decided: March 3, 2005

Do Not Publish