Oscar Dean v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 227th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

No. 04-00-00168-CR
Oscar Lorin DEAN,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1993-CR-7033
Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 27, 2001

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Oscar Dean pled guilty to the offense of aggravated robbery and was sentenced to ten years deferred adjudication in accordance with the terms of his plea bargain agreement. After Dean violated several of the terms of his community supervision, his guilt was adjudicated, and he was assessed fifteen years imprisonment. Dean appeals from his adjudication and sentence.

To invoke the court's jurisdiction over this appeal, rule 25.2(b)(3) requires that the notice of appeal specify that the appeal is from a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3) (limiting issues that my be raised on appeal if punishment does not exceed recommendation). Because Dean's general notice of appeal did not meet any of the requirements of rule 25.2(b)(3), this court only has jurisdiction to consider issues relating to the trial court's jurisdiction or the trial court's failure to conduct a punishment hearing after adjudicating guilt. See Cooper v. State, no. 1100-99, 2001 WL 321579 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 4, 2001); Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661-62 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Pearson v. State, 994 S.W.2d 176, 179 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d 711, 714-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).

In three points of error Dean asserts that the trial court erred at the hearing adjudicating his guilt because (1) he was not admonished on the range of punishment; (2) his sentence exceeded that agreed to in his plea bargain; and (3) his plea was involuntary because of ineffective assistance of counsel. Dean was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain when he was placed on deferred adjudication probation. See Ditto v. State, 988 S.W.2d 236, 238 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d at 714. Therefore, the appeal does not raise any issues that this court has jurisdiction to consider. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH