Rodolfo Sanchez v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 227th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Annotate this CaseRodolfo SANCHEZ,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1998-CR-0991
Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice
Catherine Stone, Justice
Paul W. Green, Justice
Sarah B. Duncan, Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 7, 2003
AMENDED CERTIFICATION ORDERED
In accordance with his plea bargain agreement, Rodolfo Sanchez was convicted of driving while intoxicated. Sanchez's sentence was suspended, and he was placed on community supervision. The trial court subsequently entered a judgment revoking Sanchez's community supervision, and Sanchez seeks to appeal the revocation.
In accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), the trial court signed a certification of defendant's right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). The certification states that the underlying case "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal."
Before the 2003 amendments to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, rule 25.2(b)(3) required a notice of appeal to specify that the appeal was for a jurisdictional defect, related to a pre-trial ruling on a written motion, or permission to appeal was granted in order to invoke this court's jurisdiction. With regard to appeals of judgments revoking community supervision, however, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that such appeals were not limited by rule 40(b)(1), which was amended and replaced by rule 25.2(b)(3) in 1997. See Feagin v. State, 967 S.W.2d 417, 419 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
The 2003 amendments require trial courts to certify a defendant's right of appeal under rule 25.2(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). Rule 25.2(a)(2), like former rule 25.2(b)(3), limits a defendant's right of appeal in plea bargain cases. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). In plea bargain cases, rule 25.2(a)(2) only allows a defendant to appeal matters raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or if the defendant has the trial court's permission to appeal. See id. Because the prior rule was held not to limit an appeal "attacking the propriety of orders revoking probation," we hold that rule 25.2(a)(2) also does not limit such an appeal. Feagin, 967 S.W.2d at 419. Accordingly, the trial court's certification is defective, and the trial court is ordered to correct the defect. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.1.
PER CURIAM
PUBLISH
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.