Raney, Derrick L. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 176th District Court of Harris County

Annotate this Case
Dismissed and Opinion filed June 20, 2002

Dismissed and Opinion filed  June 20, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-01-00545-CR

____________

DERRICK L. RANEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 856,498

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant pled guilty to the felony offense of possession of phenycyclidine on April 4, 2001. In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant to five years confinement, probated, and a $300 fine. As part of the plea bargain agreement, appellant signed a written waiver of his right to appeal. Because appellant has waived his right to appeal, we dismiss.

Appellant pled guilty and the trial court followed the plea bargain agreement in assessing punishment. Despite having waived the right to appeal, appellant filed a notice of appeal. Appellant chose to enter into an agreement that included a waiver of the right to appeal. Appellant was informed of his right to appeal, knew with certainty the punishment he would receive, and that he could withdraw his plea if the trial court did not act in accordance with the plea agreement. As appellant was fully aware of the consequences


when he waived his right to appeal, it is not unfair to expect him to live with those consequences now. Alzarka v. State, 60 S.W.3d 203, 206 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] July 26, 2001, pet. granted) (quotingMabry v. Johnson, 467 U.S. 504, 104 S. Ct. 2543, 2547 48, 81 L. Ed. 2d 437 (1984)). See also Blanco v. State, 18 S.W.3d 218, 219 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); Buck v. State, 45 S.W.3d 275, 278 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed June 20, 2002.

Panel consists of Yates, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).

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.