Donald Martin Moore v. The State of Texas Appeal from 144th 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. 04-19-00537-CR Donald Martin MOORE, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CR5878 Honorable Mark Luitjen, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Delivered and Filed: September 25, 2019 DISMISSED The trial court’s certification in this appeal states that “this criminal case 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 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 this 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). 04-19-00537-CR On August 14, 2019, we notified Appellant that this appeal would be dismissed under Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that Appellant has the right of appeal was made part of the appellate record by September 3, 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.). To date, no response has been filed. Absent an amended trial court certification showing that Appellant has the right of appeal, Rule 25.2(d) requires this court to dismiss this appeal. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 613; Daniels, 110 S.W.3d at 176. Accordingly, this appeal is 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 PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.