Devon Marcell Williams v. The State of Texas Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2 of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-21-00395-CR Devon Marcell WILLIAMS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the County Court at Law No. 2, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 654573 Honorable Grace M. Uzomba, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Delivered and Filed: November 24, 2021 DISMISSED In the clerk’s record for this appeal, the trial court’s certification states “this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” It also 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). Under Rule 25.2, if the clerk’s record does not contain “a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal,” this court must dismiss this appeal. Id. R. 25.2(d); see Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). 04-21-00395-CR On October 4, 2021, 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 November 3, 3021. 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. Because no response has been filed that contains 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 PER CURIAM Do not publish -2-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.