Morris v. State, 02-22-00249-CR

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
Writing for the CourtBRIAN WALKER JUSTICE
PartiesKevin Brian Morris, Appellant v. The State of Texas
Docket Number02-22-00249-CR,02-22-00250-CR,02-22-00251-CR
Decision Date23 November 2022

Kevin Brian Morris, Appellant
v.

The State of Texas

Nos. 02-22-00249-CR, 02-22-00250-CR, 02-22-00251-CR

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth

November 23, 2022


Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)

On Appeal from the 371st District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 1734441D, 1734442D, 1734443D

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.

1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BRIAN WALKER JUSTICE

On October 5, 2022, Appellant Kevin Brian Morris pleaded guilty to charges of possession of a controlled substance, attempted unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, and unauthorized use of a vehicle. Pursuant to these plea agreements, the trial court entered its certifications of defendant's right of appeal in accordance with rule 25.2(a)(2). See Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(a)(2). Each certification stated that the case was a plea-bargain case from which Morris has no right of appeal.

On October 12, 2022, Morris filed his pro se notices of appeal for each case. On October 18, 2022, we notified Morris that the certifications filed with this court indicated that he had no right to appeal. We informed Morris that his appeals may be dismissed unless he or any other party desiring to continue the appeals filed with our court, on or before October 28, 2022, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Morris responded that the appeals should continue because (1) the trial court had failed to "assess [him] as [a] long-term Mental Health Patient through MHMR Evaluation for Competency, (2) the trial court had failed to "appoint MHMR Representation of Counsel to [him] despite written request to Trial Court - Ineffective Assistance of Counsel based on MHMR needs," and (3) the State had failed to "reveal essential fingerprint evidence to [him] despite written motions requesting such evidence to be exchanged."[1]

2

Rule 25.2(a)(2) limits a defendant's right to appeal in a plea bargain case to those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, after obtaining the trial court's permission to appeal, or where expressly authorized by statute. Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(a)(2)(A)-(C). Relatedly, to preserve for appellate review a complaint that he is entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, the defendant must have raised his complaint in a motion for new trial. See Pitman v. State, 372 S.W.3d 261, 264 n.2 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2012, pet. ref'd) (citing Keeter v. State, 175 S.W.3d 756, 759-61...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT