Veronda (Verhonda) Terrell v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 227th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Annotate this Case
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-03-00445-CR
Verhonda Brackens TERRELL,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2003-CR-3318-W
Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 29, 2003

APPEAL DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Verhonda Terrell ("Terrell"), entered a plea of nolo contendere to theft under $1,500. The trial court imposed sentence on June 2, 2003. Terrell appeals her conviction.

The trial court's certification in this appeal states that "this is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." The clerk's record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment assessed by the trial court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Terrell; therefore, the trial court's certification appears to accurately reflect that the underlying case is a plea-bargain case. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, "[t]he appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules." Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). On August 4, 2003, we ordered that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless an amended trial court certification showing that Terrell had the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record by September 4, 2003. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 177 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 2003, order). An amended certification that shows Terrell has the right of appeal has not been filed. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

Do Not Publish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.