Carlos Williams v. The State of Texas Appeal from 174th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Opinion issued September 25, 2014. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-13-00998-CV CARLOS WILLIAMS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1352071 MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to an agreement with the State, appellant, Carlos Williams, pleaded guilty to the offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years of age.1 The trial court accepted the plea agreement, assessed appellant s punishment at confinement for twelve years, and certified that this is a pleabargained case and he has no right of appeal. We dismiss the appeal. In a plea-bargained case, a defendant may appeal only those matters that were raised by written motion and ruled on before trial or after obtaining the trial court s permission to appeal. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. Art 44.02 (West 2006); TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Here, the trial court s certification is included in the record and states that this is a plea-bargained case and appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 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. ). 1 See TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 22.021(a)(1)(B), 2(B) (West Supp. 2014). 2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss all pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Higley, Bland, and Sharp. Do not publish.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.