Juan Martin Rosas v. the State of Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-26-00299-CR

Juan Martin ROSAS,
Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,
Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2025-CR-004149A
Honorable Michael E. Mery, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Adrian A. Spears II, Justice
H. Todd McCray, Justice
Velia J. Meza, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 17, 2026

DISMISSED

Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Juan Martin Rosas pled nolo contendere to theft of

property and was sentenced to three years in prison in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain

agreement. On March 9, 2026, the trial court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal

stating that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). After Rosas filed a notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the
04-26-00299-CR

certification and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes

the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id. 25.2(d).

“In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised

by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to

appeal, or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” Id. 25.2(a)(2). The

clerk’s record, which contains a written plea bargain, establishes that the punishment assessed by

the trial court does not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by

Rosas. See id. The clerk’s record does not include a written motion filed and ruled upon before

trial; nor does it indicate that the trial court gave its permission to appeal. See id. Thus, the trial

court’s certification appears to accurately reflect that this is a plea-bargain case and that Rosas

does not have the right to appeal. We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the

defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d).

We informed Rosas that this appeal would be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification showing that he had the

right to appeal was made part of the appellate record. See id. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. State, 110

S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order). No such amended trial court certification has

been filed. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-