Ivery Knox Phillips v. The State of Texas Appeal from 371st District Court of Tarrant County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-18-00490-CR No. 02-18-00491-CR No. 02-18-00492-CR No. 02-18-00493-CR No. 02-18-00494-CR No. 02-18-00495-CR ___________________________ IVERY KNOX PHILLIPS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 371st District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 1546453D, 1544736R, 1544741R, 1544740R, 1544738R, 1544737R Before Womack, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Gabriel J. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Ivery Knox Phillips attempts to appeal from his convictions and six twenty-year concurrent sentences1 for theft in the amount of more than $2,500 but less than $30,000. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03. In these cases, the trial court signed certifications of Phillips’s right to appeal. The certifications state that each case is “a plea-bargain case, and [Phillips] has NO right of appeal.” Phillips and his trial counsel signed the certifications. Nonetheless, Phillips filed pro se notices of appeal. On November 15, 2018, we sent a letter to Phillips informing him of the statements in the certifications, and we explained that unless he filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals by November 26, 2018, the appeals could be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d), 44.3. Phillips has not responded to our letter. Thus, in accordance with the trial court’s certifications that Phillips has no right to appeal, we dismiss the appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Per Curiam Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) Delivered: April 11, 2019 The trial court’s judgments also reflect that Phillips pleaded “True” to the indictments’ enhancement paragraphs. 1 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.