COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 2-08-310-CR

TOMMY JOSEPH CHATMAN APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ------------ FROM THE 371ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ------------ MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 ------------ Appellant Tommy Joseph Chatman pleaded guilty to two counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance of four grams or more but less than 200 grams. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Chatman was sentenced to ten years’ confinement for one count and eight years’ confinement for the other count. The trial court entered its certification of

… See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

Chatman’s right to appeal in accordance with rule 25.2(a)(2). See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The certification states that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.”

On August 27, 2008, Chatman filed a notice of appeal. On September 3, 2008, we notified Chatman’s counsel that the certification indicating his client had no right to appeal had been filed in this court and that this appeal would be dismissed unless Chatman or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). Chatman responded with a copy of a “Motion of Appeal” and stated that he was told he could “appeal under Attorney Ineffective.”

Rule 25.2(a)(2) limits the right to appeal in a plea bargain case to those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial or after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2)(A), (B). Chatman does not contend that he did either of these things. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM PANEL: HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: October 2, 2008