Michael Dean Samuelson v. the State of Texas
Docket 02-26-00082-CR
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Court
- Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)
- Type
- Lead Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Docket
- 02-26-00082-CR
Appeal from convictions following a plea bargain in the 415th District Court, Parker County, Texas
Summary
The Court of Appeals dismissed Michael Dean Samuelson’s pro se appeal from his convictions for theft and possession with intent to deliver because the trial-court certifications, which Samuelson signed, state his case was a plea bargain and that he has no right of appeal. The court gave Samuelson until March 27, 2026 to show grounds to continue the appeal and received no response. Relying on the trial-court certifications and applicable Texas appellate rules and precedent, the panel dismissed the appeal without addressing the merits.
Issues Decided
- Whether an appellant may continue an appeal when the trial court’s certification, signed by the appellant, states the case is a plea-bargain case and the appellant has no right of appeal
- Whether lack of a timely showing of grounds to proceed overcomes a trial-court certification that the appellant has no right of appeal
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on the signed trial-court certifications stating this was a plea-bargain case and that the appellant lacks a right to appeal. Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2 and controlling precedent, such certifications are dispositive unless a party shows grounds to continue the appeal. The court notified the appellant and provided a deadline to show grounds, received no response, and therefore dismissed the appeal consistent with the rules and case law.
Authorities Cited
- Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2
- Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 43.2(f)
- Chavez v. State183 S.W.3d 675 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)
Parties
- Appellant
- Michael Dean Samuelson
- Appellee
- The State of Texas
- Judge
- Per Curiam
Key Dates
- deadline to show grounds to continue appeal
- 2026-03-27
- opinion delivered
- 2026-04-23
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult a criminal defense attorney
Speak with counsel promptly to determine whether any post-conviction remedies (such as a motion for new trial, habeas corpus, or other relief) are available and timely under Texas law.
- 2
Confirm status of related civil actions
If the appellant is concerned about separate civil proceedings mentioned in his notice, contact an attorney to confirm the status of those county-court cases and any possible independent appeals.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court dismissed the appeal because the trial court certified that the case resulted from a plea bargain and that the appellant has no right to appeal, and the appellant did not show any reason to continue the appeal.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The decision affects Michael Dean Samuelson, whose appeal was dismissed, and the State of Texas as the respondent in the criminal appeal.
- What happens next?
- The dismissal ends this appeal; any further challenge would require an appropriate post-conviction remedy or a timely motion that fits within Texas law, subject to statutory and procedural limits.
- Could Samuelson have kept the appeal going?
- Yes — the court gave him a deadline to show grounds to continue the appeal despite the certifications; because he did not respond, the court dismissed the appeal.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-26-00082-CR
___________________________
MICHAEL DEAN SAMUELSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 415th District Court
Parker County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR23-0866
Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Michael Dean Samuelson filed a pro se notice of appeal from his
convictions for theft of property and possession of at least four but less than
200 grams of a controlled substance with intent to deliver.1 However, the trial court’s
certifications of Appellant’s right of appeal—which Appellant signed—state that this
is a plea-bargain case and that Appellant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.
25.2(a)(2), (d).
We reminded Appellant of the certifications and warned him that we could
dismiss the appeal unless, by March 27, 2026, he or another party showed grounds for
continuing it. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. We have received no response.
Thus, in accordance with the trial court’s certifications, we dismiss Appellant’s
appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2006); Joseph v. State, No. 02-25-00335-CR, 2025 WL 2942406, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth Oct. 16, 2025, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: April 23, 2026
In his notice of appeal, Appellant complains about the proceedings in two civil
1
actions to determine ownership of certain property. Those cases are separate from his
criminal convictions and are still pending in the county court.
2