Opinion issued July 16, 2009

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-08-00123-CR

____________

FRANK DANIEL JOHNSON, III, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1106796

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Frank Daniel Johnson, III, pleaded guilty to the offense of burglary of a habitation with an agreement from the State that his punishment would not exceed confinement for 20 years.

Along with the plea, appellant, appellant's counsel, and the State signed a stipulation of evidence which included, among others, the following statements: "I intend to enter a plea of guilty and understand that the prosecutor will recommend that my punishment should be set at PSI Hearing w/ a cap of 20 yrs TDC and I agree to that recommendation . . .Further, I waive my right of appeal which I may have should the court accept the foregoing plea bargain agreement between myself and the prosecutor." In accordance with appellant's plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 20 years. Appellant did not request the trial court's permission to appeal any pre-trial matters, and the trial court did not give appellant permission to appeal. Appellant filed a timely pro se notice of appeal.

In a plea-bargained case in which the punishment assessed does not exceed the plea agreement, a defendant may appeal only those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, or after obtaining the trial court's permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2 9a) (2); see Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (holding that agreement to punishment cap is plea bargain for purposes of Rule 25.2); Shankle v. State, 119 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (same).

The trial court's certification of appellant's right to appeal states that this is a plea-bargained case and appellant has no right to appeal. The record supports the certification. We must dismiss an appeal "without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal" if the trial court's certification shows there is no right to appeal. Chavez, 183 S.W.3d at 680

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Any pending motions are denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Alcala, and Higley.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).