Tomas Caminorreal, Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 2 of Victoria County

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Texas » 13th District Court of Appeals » 2004 » Tomas Caminorreal, Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 2 of Victoria County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 13-04-00602-CR

Case Date: 12/16/2004

Plaintiff: Tomas Caminorreal, Jr.

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 2 of Victoria County

Preview:Michael D. Bonnet v. State of Texas--Appeal from 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Nos. 04-00-00846-CR; 04-00-00847-CR; 04-00-00848-CR; 04-00-00849-CR; 04-00-00850-CR Michael BONNET, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2000-CR-2560 Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice Tom Rickhoff , Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Delivered and Filed: May 31, 2001 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Michael Bonnet pleaded guilty to five counts of aggravated robbery. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, the trial court sentenced him to twenty five years imprisonment for each offense, with his sentences to run concurrently. Bonnet filed general notices of appeal. When a judgment is rendered on a defendant's plea of guilty pursuant to a plea bargain in a felony case, and the punishment does not exceed that recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant, the defendant's notice of appeal must: (1) articulate that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect; (2) specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial; or (3) state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3); Young v. State, 8 S.W.3d 656, 666-67 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). A timely notice of appeal that complies with Rule 25.2(b)(3) is necessary to this court's jurisdiction, which is limited to those issues concerning the trial court's jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3); Cooper v. State, No. 1100-99, slip op. at 6-7, 2001 WL 321579, at *1 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 4, 2001); State v. Riewe, 13 S.W.3d 408, 410 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). Under a general notice of appeal, we may review only those issues concerning the trial court's jurisdiction. See Martinez v. State, 5 S.W.3d 722, 724-25 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1999, no pet.). Rule 25.2(b)(3) applies to Bonnet's appeal. However, his notices of appeal are general and do not comply with the rule. This court, therefore, requested Bonnet to submit a letter brief identifying those issues or points to be raised on appeal and to explain why those issues or points warranted continuation of his appeal.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13969.html[8/20/2013 7:33:47 PM]

Bonnet responded to this court's order on May 11, 2001. In his response, he indicated that he would be raising the following issues in his appeal: the voluntariness of his plea; that the district attorney breached the plea agreement; and that "but-for the 'misinforming, inept Counsel,' he would not have entered his plea." We do not have jurisdiction to review these issues. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3); Cooper, 2001 WL 321579 (holding voluntariness of plea may not be raised on appeal from plea-bargained, felony conviction). We, therefore, dismiss Bonnet's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13969.html[8/20/2013 7:33:47 PM]

Download 13969.pdf