Daveyonne Howard v. the State of Texas

Opinion issued August 19, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals
For The

First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-24-00903-CR
———————————
DAVEYONNE HOWARD, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 178th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1759517

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Daveyonne Howard pleaded guilty to the felony offense of murder.1

The trial court found appellant guilty and sentenced appellant to 40 years’

confinement. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal.

1
See TEX. PENAL CODE § 19.02.
In a plea bargain case, a defendant may only appeal 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. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 44.02; TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

A charge bargain, like that entered into by appellant and the State in this case, where

the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for the prosecutor dismissing other

charges, is a plea bargain under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2. See Shankle

v. State, 119 S.W.3d 808, 813–14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). An appeal must be

dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal has not

been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See id.

The trial court’s certification states that this is a plea-bargain case and that the

defendant has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record further

shows that appellant pled guilty to murder in exchange for the State’s agreement to

dismiss other charges. This charge bargain constitutes a plea bargain subject to Rule

25.2(a)(2). See Shankle, 119 S.W.3d at 813–14. The record does not reflect the trial

court’s permission to appeal or any pretrial motions that could be appealed. Thus,

the record supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610,

615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must

dismiss this appeal. See Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App.

2
2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an

appellant who plea-bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must dismiss

a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal.”).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss any

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Caughey and Johnson.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

3