Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2007

David Wayne Rosson v. State

David Wayne Rosson v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided January 30, 2007

David Wayne Rosson v. State

Opinion

















In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________



No. 06-06-00227-CR

______________________________





DAVID WAYNE ROSSON, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee






On Appeal from the 102nd Judicial District Court

Red River County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR00882










Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter



MEMORANDUM OPINION



David Wayne Rosson appeals from the order placing him on deferred adjudication for the offense of indecency with a child. We dismiss Rosson's appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The trial court filed a certification, in accordance with Rule 25.2(a)(2), that Rosson "waived the right of appeal." Rule 25.2(a)(2) states, in pertinent part:

(2) . . . A defendant in a criminal case has the right of appeal under Code of Criminal Procedure article 44.02 and these rules. The trial court shall enter a certification of the defendant's right of appeal in every case in which it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order.

Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). If a certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal is not made a part of the appellate record, we must dismiss the case unless the record affirmatively indicates that an appellant may have the right of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); see Greenwell v. Court of Appeals for Thirteenth Judicial Dist., 159 S.W.3d 645, 649 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 612 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We have examined the clerk's record to determine whether the trial court's certification is defective. See Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 613. Nothing in the record indicates the certification is defective. This Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. (1)



We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.



Jack Carter

Justice



Date Submitted: January 29, 2007

Date Decided: January 30, 2007



Do Not Publish

1. The negotiated plea agreement in this case demonstrates that Rosson's waiver of appeal was done knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. See Ex parte Delaney, 207 S.W.3d 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) ("One way to indicate that the waiver was knowing and intelligent is for the actual punishment or maximum punishment to have been determined by a plea agreement when the waiver was made.").

allowing Ridgeway to testify.

We affirm the judgment.



Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice



Date Submitted: January 2, 2003

Date Decided: February 6, 2003



Do Not Publish

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.