Danyel D Dunn v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 174th District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion to issue August 20, 2008 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ____________ NOS. 01-08-00611-CR 01-08-00612-CR ___________ DANYEL D. DUNN, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos.1127166 and 1127161 MEMORANDUM OPINION We lack jurisdiction to hear these appeals. Appellant, Danyel D. Dunn pleaded guilty to two separate offenses of burglary of a habitation with intent to commit theft and true to one enhancement paragraph contained in the indictments. In accordance with his plea bargain agreements with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 10 years in each case. Along with the plea, appellant, appellant s counsel, and the State signed a stipulation of evidence in each case which included, among others, the following statements: I intend to enter a plea of guilty and understand that the prosecutor will recommend that my punishment should be set at 10 years TDC; I agree to that recommendation...Further, I waive my right of appeal which I may have should the court accept the foregoing plea bargain agreement between myself and the prosecutor. The trial court s judgment is stamped, Appeal waived. No permission to appeal granted. After the trial court sentenced appellant to punishment in each case that fell within the terms of the plea bargain agreements, the trial court certified in each case that: this case is a plea-bargain case and the defendant had no right to appeal. Appellant did not request the trial court s permission to appeal any pre-trial matters, and the trial court did not give permission for appellant to appeal. Appellant filed a timely pro se notice of appeal in each case. These appeals followed. We conclude that the certifications of the right of appeal filed by the trial court in cause number 1127166 and 1127161 are supported by the record and that appellant has no right of appeal due to the agreed plea bargains. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal without further action. Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Any pending motions are denied as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justice Taft, Jennings, and Bland. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
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.
