Sean Carlton Lacey v. The State of Texas Appeal from 399th 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. 04-19-00556-CR, 04-19-00557-CR, 04-19-00558-CR, 04-19-00559-CR & 04-19-00560-CR Sean Carlton LACEY, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 2018CR13328, 2018CR13305, 2018CR12079, 2018CR12614 & 2018CR12615 Honorable Frank J. Castro, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 2, 2019 DISMISSED The trial court’s certification in each of these companion appeals states: “[T]his criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” “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.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The clerk’s records, which each contain a written plea bargain, establish the punishment assessed by the court does not exceed the punishment recommended by 04-19-00556-CR, 04-19-00557-CR, 19-00558-CR, 04-19-00559-CR, 04-19-00560-CR the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant. See id. The clerk’s records do not include written motions filed and ruled upon before trial, nor do they indicate the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id. The trial court’s certifications, therefore, appear to accurately reflect that these are plea-bargain cases and appellant 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.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). We issued an order stating these appeals would be dismissed unless amended trial court certifications were made part of the appellate record by September 23, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). No amended certifications were filed. Accordingly, these appeals are 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 PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH -2-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.
