Jonathan Raunel Despaigne v. the State of Texas

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 23, 2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-23-00903-CR

JONATHAN RAUNEL DESPAIGNE, Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 185th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1665212

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant was charged with two aggravated assaults with a deadly weapon.
See Tex. Penal Code. Ann. § 22.02. On June 14, 2023, appellant entered a plea of
guilty in trial-court cause number 1720026 (appellate case number
14-23-00904-CR) and went without an agreed recommendation to a pre-sentence
investigation hearing. The State dismissed trial-court cause number 1665212. On
November 17, 2023, after the pre-sentence investigation hearing, the trial court in
trial-court cause number 1720026 found appellant guilty and assessed punishment
at 10-years imprisonment.
In accordance with the terms of a plea-bargain agreement, appellant waived
his right to appeal in trial-court cause number 1720026 in consideration of the
State’s waiver of its right to a jury trial and dismissal of the second felony
indictment in trial-court cause number 1665212. See Ex parte Broadway, 301
S.W.3d 694 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (defendant may voluntarily waive right to
appeal pursuant to plea bargain when sentencing is not agreed upon and
defendant’s punishment is uncertain). After appellant’s conviction and assessment
of punishment in trial-court cause number 1720026, the trial court signed a
certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in which the court certified that this
is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App.
P. 25.2(a)(2). The judgment and certification are included in the record on appeal
for appellate case number 14-23-00904-CR. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).
This appeal is the result of appellant filing a pro se notice of appeal from the
dismissal of the second indictment of aggravated assaults with a deadly weapon.1
On March 13, 2024, this court notified the parties that the appeal would be
dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless a party demonstrated that the court has
jurisdiction. Appellant did not file a response.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Spain, and Hassan.

Do Not Publish – Tex.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

1
The clerk’s record in this appeal contains the trial court’s dismissal order and a
certification of the defendant’s right of appeal. That certification was unnecessary.

2