Edward Hernandez v. The State of Texas Appeal from 175th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00647-CR Edward HERNANDEZ, Appellant v. The State of The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013CR10559 Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 1, 2014 DISMISSED On September 18, 2014, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing appellant had the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 175 76 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2003, order). Appellant s counsel filed a response in which he states that he has reviewed the clerk s record and can find no right of appeal for appellant; counsel concedes that the appeal must be dismissed. In light of the record presented, we agree with appellant s counsel that Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this 04-14-00647-CR appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). The record does not contain a certification that shows appellant has the right of appeal; to the contrary, the trial court certification in the record states this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal. The record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by appellant. Therefore, the record supports the trial court s certification that the appellant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). PER CURIAM Do not publish -2-

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.