Jerome Osborne Folkes v. The State of Texas Appeal from 209th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued January 9, 2018 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-17-00510-CR NO. 01-17-00511-CR ——————————— JEROME OSBORNE FOLKES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 209th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case Nos. 1501076 & 1501077 MEMORANDUM OPINION Jerome Osborne Folkes pleaded guilty to (1) the offense of possession of a firearm by felon in trial court cause number 1501076 and (2) the offense of evading arrest/detection with a vehicle in trial court cause number 1501077. In accordance with his plea agreements with the State, Folkes was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment in each case with the sentences running concurrently. Folkes, acting pro se, filed a notice of appeal from these convictions. We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. In a plea bargain case, a defendant may only 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. See 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. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). The trial court’s certifications in both cases are included in the records on appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification in each case states that it is a plea bargain case and that the defendant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The records in both appeals support the trial court’s certifications. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because Folkes has no right of appeal, we must dismiss these appeals. 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 appeals for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Lloyd. Do not publish.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.
