Christopher Ryan Wigley v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 371st District Court of Tarrant County (per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-12-00303-CR CHRISTOPHER RYAN WIGLEY APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------FROM THE 371ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ---------On June 21, 2012, as part of a plea bargain agreement, Appellant Christopher Ryan Wigley pled guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm and the trial court sentenced him to five years confinement. On the same day, the trial court certified that this is a plea bargain case and that Appellant has no right of 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. appeal. Despite the trial court s certification, Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on July 10, 2012. On July 10, 2012, we notified Appellant and Appellant s appointed counsel that the certification indicating that Appellant had no right to appeal had been filed in this court, and that this appeal could be dismissed unless Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal on or before July 20, 2012. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. On July 16, 2012, Appellant filed a pro se response citing rule 25.2(a)(2)(a) as providing grounds to continue his appeal. Rule 25.2(a)(2) limits the right of appeal in a plea-bargain case to matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or to cases in which the appellant obtained the trial court s permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record shows that there are no written motions filed and ruled on before trial and that Appellant did not obtain the trial court s permission to appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), 43.2(f). PER CURIAM PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: August 9, 2012 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.
