Daniel Jacobson v. The State of Texas Appeal from 182nd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued October 13, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00169-CR ——————————— DANIEL JACOBSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 182nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1485376 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Daniel Jacobson pleaded guilty to the offense of driving while intoxicated. See TEX. PENAL CODE § 49.04. In accordance with Jacobson’s plea bargain, the trial court sentenced him to imprisonment for five years, but it suspended the sentence and placed him on community supervision for five years. Jacobson filed a notice of appeal. The State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, contending he has no right to appeal. Jacobson has not responded to this motion. In a plea bargain case, a defendant only may appeal 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. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 44.02; 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). Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See id. 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). 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 grant the State’s motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Bland, Massengale, and Lloyd. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 2
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.
