Joseph Lee Brummett v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 241st District Court of Smith County

NO. 12-02-00298-CR
NO. 12-02-00299-CR
NO. 12-02-00300-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS

JOSEPH LEE BRUMMETT,

 
APPEAL FROM THE 241ST

APPELLANT

 

V.

 
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE

 
SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Joseph Lee Brummett ("Appellant") appeals his sentences of thirty years, ten years, and ten years of imprisonment on three separate charges of possession of a controlled substance. Appellant presents two issues for review. Because Appellant waived his right to appeal, we dismiss.

Appellant was indicted on three separate occasions for possession of a controlled substance, namely methamphetamine. In the first two indictments, Appellant was charged with possessing methamphetamine in an amount of one gram or more but less than four grams. In the third indictment, Appellant was charged with possessing methamphetamine in an amount of 400 grams or more.

On July 1, Appellant pleaded guilty to each of the charges in open court. After hearing argument from the parties as to the type of punishment Appellant should receive, the trial court sentenced Appellant to ten years of imprisonment on each charge of possessing one gram or more but less than four grams of methamphetamine and thirty years of imprisonment on the charge of possessing 400 grams or more of methamphetamine. Appellant was also credited for the time he served after he was arrested.

At the hearing, the trial court also admonished Appellant that by pleading guilty, he was waiving his right to have a jury decide the punishment he would receive and that he was also waiving his right to appeal the decision the court made as to punishment. At the conclusion of the hearing, Appellant's attorney presented, and the trial court accepted, three documents entitled "Waiver of Motion for New Trial and Motion in Arrest of Judgment and Waiver of Right to Appeal," which stated that Appellant "does not wish to appeal his/her conviction and expressly waives his/her right to appeal." These documents, one for each charge, were signed by Appellant and his attorney and also included a fiat, signed by the trial court, granting Appellant's motion to waive his right to appeal.

A defendant in a non-capital felony case may waive any right secured to him by law. Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Ann. art. 1.14(a) (Vernon Supp. 2003). A valid waiver of the right to appeal, whether negotiated or non-negotiated, will prevent a defendant from appealing without the consent of the trial court. Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). A waiver of the right to appeal is valid when it is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently. Id.

The trial court admonished Appellant that by pleading guilty to the charges, he would also be waiving his right to appeal the trial court's decision on punishment. Appellant acknowledged that he understood that he would be waiving his right to appeal. The reporter's record also indicates that Appellant's waiver of the right to appeal was presented to and accepted by the trial court, without any objection by Appellant, after Appellant was sentenced. Because the waiver was tendered to the trial court and accepted, without objection, Appellant's waiver was valid. Furthermore, the clerk's record, including Appellant's notice of appeal, is devoid of any evidence showing that Appellant had received permission from the trial court before he attempted to appeal his sentences; therefore, he cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this court.

Accordingly, we hold that Appellant validly waived his right to appeal; therefore, his appeal is dismissed.

JAMES T. WORTHEN

Chief Justice

Opinion delivered May 30, 2003.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J. and Griffith, J.

 
(DO NOT PUBLISH)