John Gabriel Castillo v. The State of Texas Appeal from 187th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION Nos. 04-19-00254-CR, 04-19-00256-CR, 04-19-00257-CR, 04-19-00260-CR John Gabriel CASTILLO, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 2016CR10071, 2018CR0407, 2019CR2595, 2019CR2598 Honorable Stephanie R. Boyd, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 12, 2019 DISMISSED The trial court’s certification in each of these appeals state that “this criminal case is a pleabargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” Each clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; Rule 25.2(a)(2) applies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). 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 under these rules.” Id. R. 25.2(d); see Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 04-19-00254-CR, 04-19-00256-CR, 04-19-00257-CR, 04-19-00260-CR On May 6, 2019, we notified Appellant that these appeals would be dismissed under Rule 25.2(d) unless amended trial court certifications showing that Appellant has the right of appeal were filed in this court by May 28, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 176 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). On May 31, 2019, court-appointed appellate counsel filed a letter acknowledging that Appellant has no right of appeal in these cases. Absent amended trial court certifications showing that Appellant has the right of appeal, Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss these appeals. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 613; Daniels, 110 S.W.3d at 176. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.