ROMAN MANCIAS, III v. THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 156th District Court of Bee County

Annotate this Case
NUMBERS
13-07-071-CR
13-07-072-CR
13-07-073-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________________________________

 

ROMAN MANCIAS, III, Appellant,

 
v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

__________________________________________________________________

 
On appeal from the 156th District Court
of Bee County, Texas.

__________________________________________________________________

 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Vela
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, ROMAN MANCIAS, III, attempts to appeal convictions rendered by the 156th District Court of Bee County, Texas, in trial court cause numbers B-06-2152-0-CR-B, B-06-2153-0-CR-B, and B-06-2154-0-CR-B. The trial court has certified that each "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

On February 6, 2007, this Court notified appellant's counsel of the trial court's certifications and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel's findings as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the existence of any amended certification.

On March 5, 2007, counsel filed a letter brief with this Court. Counsel's response does not establish (1) that the certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect or (2) that appellant otherwise has a right to appeal.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court's certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); see Tex. R. App. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 22nd day of March, 2007.

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.