Leticia Monae Young 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. 04-20-00414-CR Leticia Monae YOUNG, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017CR7162 Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 21, 2020 DISMISSED The trial court’s certification in this appeal 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 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 trial court’s certification, therefore, 04-20-00414-CR appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case 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). On September 3, 2020, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed unless an amended trial court certification was made part of the appellate record by October 5, 2020. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; see also Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). No such amended trial court certification has been filed. Accordingly, 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 PER CURIAM Do not publish -2-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.