Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Roland Contreras was indicted for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and pleaded not guilty. He initially elected to have the jury assess punishment if it found him guilty. On March 27, 2026, the jury found him guilty as charged.
After the verdict, Contreras waived jury punishment and entered an agreement with the State recommending a 20-year sentence to run concurrently with his sentence in another case. In exchange for the State’s recommendation, and provided the court did not exceed the agreed punishment, Contreras agreed to waive his right to appeal. The trial court imposed the agreed 20-year concurrent sentence and certified that Contreras had waived his appellate rights.
The Fourth Court of Appeals gave Contreras an opportunity to obtain an amended certification showing a right to appeal. None was filed. His appointed counsel instead advised the court that the waiver was supported by consideration from the State and that counsel could identify no nonfrivolous appellate grounds in light of the waiver.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that the record supported the trial court’s certification that Contreras had waived his right to appeal. The waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because Contreras made it after the guilty verdict in exchange for the State’s agreement not to seek a longer punishment or cumulative sentences, and the trial court imposed punishment within that agreement.
Because nothing in the record showed that the trial court had granted permission to appeal, and no amended certification establishing a right of appeal was added to the record, the court dismissed the appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d).
Key Takeaways
- A defendant may validly waive the right to appeal after a jury’s guilty verdict when the waiver is knowing, intelligent, voluntary, and supported by consideration from the State.
- The appellate court independently examined the record and found the trial court’s certification accurately reflected Contreras’s waiver.
- Without a certification showing a right to appeal or permission from the trial court, Rule 25.2(d) required dismissal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that a negotiated appellate waiver can be enforceable even when the defendant contested guilt at a jury trial, if the waiver is later exchanged for a sentencing benefit. It also underscores that an accurate certification denying a right of appeal is a threshold bar that requires dismissal unless the record is amended to establish appellate jurisdiction.