Fernando Puente v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 186th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-05-00160-CR

Fernando PUENTE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-CR-0682W

Honorable Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 6, 2005

DISMISSED

Fernando Puente pleaded nolo contendere to possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver pursuant to a plea bargain agreement. The trial court imposed sentence in accordance with the agreement and signed a certificate stating the defendant has waived the right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Puente timely filed a notice of appeal. The clerk s record, which includes the trial court s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

The clerk s record, which contains a written plea bargain agreement, establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. Ordinarily, [i]n a plea bargain case ... a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or (B) after getting the trial court s permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). However, as part of his plea bargain, Puente signed a waiver of this limited right of appeal. He therefore may not appeal without the consent of the trial court. See Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). The clerk s record does not indicate the trial court gave Puente permission to appeal. The trial court s certification therefore appears to accurately reflect that Puente waived his limited right to appeal. This court must dismiss an appeal if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

On May 5, 2005, we gave Puente notice that the appeal would be dismissed unless written consent to appeal and an amended certification showing he has the right to appeal were signed by the trial judge and made part of the appellate record by June 6, 2005. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2003, order), disp. on merits, No. 04-03-00176-CR, 2003 WL 21508347 (July 2, 2003, pet. filed) (not designated for publication). Neither written permission to appeal nor an amended certification showing Puente has the right to appeal has been filed. We therefore dismiss this appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

Do not publish