Robert Thompson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 228th District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued March 31, 2011
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01-10-01050-CR
____________
ROBERT THOMPSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 228th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1277989
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Robert Thompson, pleaded guilty to the offense of failure to
comply with sex registration requirements. The trial court found appellant guilty,
and, in accordance with the terms of appellant’s plea bargain agreement with the
State, sentenced appellant to two years’ confinement. Appellant filed a pro se
notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal.
In a plea bargain case, a defendant may 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. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be
dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has
not been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2)(d).
Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). The trial court’s certification states that this is a plea
bargain case and that the defendant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P.
25.2(a)(2). Appellant did not appeal any pre-trial matters, and the trial court did not
give permission for appellant to appeal. The record supports the trial court’s
certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal. See Chavez
v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while
having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant who plea-bargained is
permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss a prohibited appeal without
further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. All pending
motions are dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Brown.
2
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
3
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.