Rickie Rodriguez v. The State of Texas Appeal from 226th 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. 04-18-00944-CR Rickie RODRIGUEZ, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2018CR4578 Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Delivered and Filed: January 30, 2019 DISMISSED Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Rickie Rodriguez pled nolo contendere to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and was sentenced to five years of imprisonment and a fine of $1500.00 in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On November 5, 2018, the trial court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that this “is a pleabargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court also certified that this is a criminal case “in which the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” After Rodriguez filed a notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the certification 04-18-00944-CR and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id. 25.2(d). “In 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.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certification, therefore, appears to accurately reflect that this is a pleabargain case and that Rodriguez does not have a right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d). On December 17, 2018, we informed Rodriguez that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that he had the right to appeal was made part of the appellate record by January 16, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial court certification has been filed. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed pursuant to Rule 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.
