James Reed v. The State of Texas
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued December 20, 2012 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00281-CR JAMES REED, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 176th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1335510 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, James Reed, pleaded guilty to the offense of failing to register as a sex offender and pleaded true to a felony enhancement. The trial court found appellant guilty, found the enhancement true, and, in accordance with the terms of appellant s plea agreement with the State, sentenced appellant to confinement for 10 years. The trial court certified that this is a plea-bargain case and that appellant does not have the right of appeal. Appellant, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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(d). The trial court s certification states that this is a plea-bargain case and that appellant does not have the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court did not rule adversely to appellant on any matters raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, and the trial court did not give permission for appellant to appeal. See id. The record supports the trial court s certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant does not have the right to appeal, we must dismiss his 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. ). 2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Huddle. Do not publish.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.
