BRANDON KEITH STRAIT A/K/A WILLIE LEE STRAIT, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

DISMISS; Opinion issued December 17, 2010
 
 
 
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
............................
No. 05-10-00549-CR
No. 05-10-00550-CR
No. 05-10-00674-CR
 
............................
BRANDON KEITH STRAIT A/K/A WILLIE LEE STRAIT, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
.............................................................
On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court
Collin County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 366-80925-09, 366-80926-09, 366-82126-09
.............................................................
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Morris, Francis, and Murphy
Opinion By Justice Morris
        In the trial court, Brandon Keith Strait a/k/a Willie Lee Strait waived a jury and pleaded guilty to two burglary of a habitation offenses and one attempted burglary of a habitation offense. Pursuant to plea agreements, the State withdrew its deadly weapon notice, and appellant agreed that deferred adjudication would not be a punishment option. As part of the plea agreement, appellant waived his right to appeal. The trial court accepted the plea agreements and assessed punishment at two concurrent ten-year sentences and one consecutive fifteen-year sentence. The trial court's rule 25.2(d) certifications of appellant's right to appeal state the cases do not involve plea bargains and appellant has the right to appeal.         The Court now has before it the State's motion to dismiss the appeals. The State asserts that because appellant entered into plea agreements to avoid allegations of a deadly weapon, and the trial court accepted the plea agreements and did not enter affirmative deadly weapon findings in the judgments, appellant has no right of appeal. Appellant did not respond to the motion to dismiss. We conclude we lack jurisdiction over the appeals.
        A plea bargain is a contract between the State and the defendant. Moore v. State, 295 S.W.3d 329, 331 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Plea bargaining consists of the prosecutor's concessions regarding punishment, lesser charges, or reduction in counts in exchange for a defendant's plea of guilty or nolo contendere. See Ex parte Williams, 637 S.W.2d 943, 948 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982). Here, the prosecutor gave up seeking deadly weapon findings in exchange for appellant's guilty pleas. A deadly weapon finding has a negative impact on a defendant's eligibility for community supervision, parole, and mandatory supervision. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 3g(a)(2) (West Supp. 2010); Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §§ 508.145, .149, .151 (West Supp. 2010). Thus, the records before us do not support the trial court's certifications. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 614-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Mercer v. State, 262 S.W.3d 810, 811 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2008, no pet.).
        Appellant entered into plea agreements and waived his right to appeal. The records do not contain any rulings on pretrial motions that would serve as a basis for appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (explaining analysis courts of appeals undertake in determining appellate rights of plea-bargaining defendants). Thus, we lack jurisdiction over the appeals. We grant the State's motion to dismiss.
        We dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction.
 
 
                                                          
                                                          JOSEPH B. MORRIS
                                                          JUSTICE
 
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47
100549F.U05