Tonje Hunt v. The State of Texas Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-16-00174-CR TONJE HUNT, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 137th District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015-406,498, Honorable John J. "Trey" McClendon III, Presiding May 31, 2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. Appellant, Tonje Hunt, appearing pro se, seeks to appeal a plea-bargained judgment of conviction for the offense of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, cocaine, in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams.1 In accordance with the terms of the plea bargain, appellant was sentenced to ten years confinement. Because appellant has no right of appeal, we will dismiss. 1 TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.112(a), (d) (West 2010). An appeal must be dismissed unless a trial court’s certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Here, the Trial Court’s Certification of the Defendant’s Right to Appeal indicates that this was “a plea-bargain case and the Defendant has NO right of appeal.” Based upon our review of the record, we find that appellant voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered into a plea bargain and that the terms of this plea bargain were accepted by the trial court. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). By letter dated May 3, 2016, we notified appellant that the trial court’s certification showed that this was a plea-bargain case for which appellant had no right of appeal. We advised appellant that the appeal must be dismissed unless an amended certification reflecting that appellant has the right of appeal is received or appellant can demonstrate other grounds for continuing the appeal by May 24, 2016. Although appellant filed a response, she did not file an amended certification and her response did not demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction. Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Per Curiam Do not publish. 2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.
