Nathan Shawn Tedford v. The State of Texas Appeal from 104th District Court of Taylor County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS NATHAN SHAWN TEDFORD, Appellant, § § No. 08-21-00003-CR v. § Appeal from the THE STATE OF TEXAS, § 104th District Court § of Taylor County, Texas1 § (TC# 22559B) Appellee. § MEMORANDUM OPINION Nathan Shawn Tedford is attempting to appeal his conviction for burglary of a habitation. We dismiss this attempted appeal because the trial court certified that Appellant does not have a right to appeal. Rule 25.2(a)(2) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure requires that the trial court enter its certification of a defendant’s right of appeal each time it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court’s certification reflects that the appeal 1 We hear this case on transfer from the Eleventh Court of Appeals. See TEX.R.APP.P. 41.3. “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal[.]” The record supports the trial court’s conclusion that Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered a negotiated guilty plea. In a plea-bargain case, a defendant may appeal only those matters raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal. TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(a)(2)(A)(B). The appellate record does not reflect that the trial court ruled on any pretrial motions or that Appellant obtained permission to appeal any issues. The Clerk’s Office notified Appellant that the certification reflects he has no right of appeal in this case and requested a response. As of this date, we have not received a response from Appellant. Based on the trial court’s certification and the record before us, we conclude that Appellant does not have a right to appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Chief Justice February 24, 2021 Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ. (Do Not Publish) 2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.
