Opinion

Rodney Darin Vaughn v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Mar 31, 2011
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 42.2%

The opinion

Opinion issued March

31, 2011

In The

Court of

Appeals

For The

First District

of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-10-00614-CR

———————————

RODNEY DARIN VAUGHN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County,

Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1261611

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On

May 6, 2010, Rodney Darin Vaughn pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to

assault of a family member. The plea

agreement provided that the trial court would defer adjudication of guilt, and

place appellant on two years’ community supervision. The plea agreement also included appellant’s

waiver of his right to appeal. See Blanco v. State , 18 S.W.3d 218 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2000). On May 6, 2010, the

trial court took appellant’s guilty plea, admonished appellant, and issued its

certification of defendant’s right of appeal, but postponed disposition of the

matter. The disposition hearing was held

July 8, 2010.

On May 24, 2010, appellant wrote in a

letter to the trial court judge asserting his plea was involuntarily given on

the basis of disinformation regarding the consequences of his plea, and stated that

“[a]lthough I admit to signing [the plea agreement,] I feel I should be able to

withdraw from my agreement or be assigned another attorney.” On June 29, 2010, the

trial court granted appellant’s motion to substitute previously appointed

counsel with retained counsel as attorneys of record in the case. At the disposition hearing on July 8, 2010, appellant’s

new counsel filed Defendant’s Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea, which the court

denied. Appellant also filed a defective

notice of appeal at the disposition hearing.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

has held that the voluntariness of a guilty plea may not be raised on appeal

following a plea bargain agreement. See Cooper v. State , 45 S.W.3d 77, 81,

83 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). Rather, the

proper avenue for attacking the voluntariness of a negotiated plea is by

application for writ of habeas corpus. See id. at 82-83 ; see Tex. Code Crim. Proc.

Ann. art. 11.072 (Vernon Supp.

2010) (habeas corpus procedure in community supervision case).

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

case, and the defendant has no right of appeal.

The certification is supported by the record. Because appellant has no right of appeal, we

must dismiss this appeal “without further action.” Chavez

v. State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for

lack of jurisdiction.

We dismiss any pending motions as

moot.

PER

CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and

Brown.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.