Martinez v. State

Full title: ERIC RAY MARTINEZ, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Jun 30, 2003

No. 05-01-01771-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 30, 2003)

Opinion

No. 05-01-01771-CR

DISMISS and Opinion issued June 30, 2003 Do Not Publish

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F-0002541-QH.

Before Chief Justice THOMAS, Justices MILLER¹ and FARRIS².

1 The Honorable Chuck Miller, Judge, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Retired, sitting by assignment.

2 The Honorable David F. Farris, Former Justice, Second District Court of Appeals, Fort Worth, Texas, sitting by assignment.

OPINION

Opinion By Chief Justice Thomas.

Eric Ray Martinez appeals his conviction of retaliation. Pursuant to a negotiated guilty plea, the trial court assessed punishment at two years' imprisonment and a $1000 fine. On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in failing to consider sua sponte whether he was competent to enter his guilty plea. In this case, appellant filed a general notice of appeal, which does not give us jurisdiction to address his complaint. See Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(b)(3) (former rule);³ Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 83 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001); York v. State, 69 S.W.3d 792, 793 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2002, no pet.) (holding court of appeals lacked jurisdiction to address question of appellant's competency because appellant filed general notice of appeal that did not comply with rule 25.2's mandatory requirements after having pleaded guilty pursuant to plea bargain with State). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

3 Rule 25.2(b) was amended to delete the provisions of subsection (b)(3), effective January 1, 2003. Because appellant filed his notice of appeal before January 1, 2003, we apply former rule 25.2(b)(3), which was in effect at the time appellant filed his notice of appeal.