Omarion Brown v. the State of Texas
Docket 01-25-01063-CR
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Court
- Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
- Type
- Lead Opinion
- Case type
- Criminal Appeal
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Docket
- 01-25-01063-CR
Appeal from convictions and sentencing after guilty pleas and stipulations in multiple felony criminal cases in Harris County district court.
Summary
The First District of Texas dismissed Omarion Brown’s appeals from five felony convictions for lack of jurisdiction because Brown validly waived his right to appeal as part of plea agreements in each case. Brown pleaded guilty or stipulated to evidence in five trial causes, signed written waivers and advisals acknowledging he understood and waived appeal rights, and the trial court’s judgments reflected the waiver. Because the record affirmatively shows the waivers were knowing and voluntary and Brown admitted the waivers to this Court, the court concluded it had no jurisdiction and dismissed the appeals and pending motions.
Issues Decided
- Whether a defendant who knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal as part of plea agreements may nevertheless proceed with an appeal without the trial court's permission.
- Whether the clerk's record, including written advisals, waivers, and judgments, affirmatively shows the defendant waived his right to appeal such that the appellate court lacks jurisdiction.
Court's Reasoning
Texas appellate rules require a trial-court certification of a defendant's right to appeal and an appellate court must dismiss if the record shows no right to appeal. The record here contained signed advisals, waivers, stipulations, and judgments stating Brown waived his right to appeal and acknowledging his understanding. Because those waivers were knowing, voluntary, and supported by the record — and Brown himself admitted the waiver — the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeals and therefore dismissed them.
Authorities Cited
- Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 25.2(a)(2) and 25.2(d)
- Carson v. State559 S.W.3d 489 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018)
- Dears v. State154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
Parties
- Appellant
- Omarion Brown
- Appellee
- The State of Texas
- Judge
- Panel: Justices Gunn, Caughey, and Morgan (Per Curiam)
Key Dates
- Opinion issued
- 2026-04-16
- Sentencing in all charges
- 2025-11-18
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult criminal defense counsel
Seek immediate legal advice to evaluate whether any collateral remedies (e.g., motion for new trial, habeas petition, or motion to withdraw plea) are available to challenge the convictions or the validity of the waiver.
- 2
Review trial-record documents
Have counsel obtain and review the full clerk's and reporter's records to determine whether the waiver was indeed knowing, voluntary, and supported by the record or whether procedural defects exist.
- 3
Consider post-conviction relief
If counsel identifies potential grounds (such as ineffective assistance of counsel or an involuntary plea), prepare appropriate post-conviction motions or petitions within applicable deadlines.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What does this decision mean?
- The court dismissed Brown's appeals because the record shows he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal as part of his plea agreements, so the appellate court has no jurisdiction to review the convictions.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- Appellant Omarion Brown is affected because his appeals were dismissed; similar dismissals could occur for other defendants whose records show valid waivers of appeal.
- What happens next?
- Because the appeals were dismissed, the trial court judgments and sentences remain in effect unless Brown obtains relief through other means such as a motion for new trial (if available), motion for appropriate relief, or post-conviction habeas applications where applicable.
- Can this dismissal be appealed?
- An appeal from the dismissal would generally not lie because the dismissal was for lack of jurisdiction due to an affirmative waiver; further relief would require showing the waiver was invalid in a proper post-conviction proceeding.
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
Opinion issued April 16, 2026
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-25-01063-CR; 01-25-01064-CR; 01-25-01065-CR; 01-25-01066-CR;
01-25-01067-CR
———————————
OMARION BROWN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 232nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case Nos. 1830949; 1867352; 1868657; 1915655; 1919056
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Omarion Brown pleaded guilty to the felony offense of theft from
person in trial cause numbers 1830949, 1867352, and 1868657.1 In doing so,
1
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 31.03.
appellant stipulated that he violated the terms and conditions of his probation,
received a bargain of one-year incarceration in state jail, and as part of his agreement
with the State, agreed to waive his right to appeal. Appellant also pleaded guilty to
the felony offense of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon in trial cause
numbers 1915655 and 1919056.2 Appellant stipulated to evidence of a new offense,
was sentenced to confinement of twelve years, and as part of his agreement with the
State, agreed to waive his right to appeal.3 Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The trial court must sign a certification of a defendant’s right of appeal each
time it enters a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P.
25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant
has a right of appeal has not been made part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d);
Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
In the five cases here, the trial court’s certification included in the record on
appeal, signed by appellant, reflects he has no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P.
25.2(d). In all cases, appellant signed an Advice of Defendant’s Right of Appeal,
advising him that if he “waived or gave up [his] right to appeal, [he] c[ould not]
appeal [his] conviction.” (Emphasis omitted.) In signing that document, appellant
2
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03.
3
Appellant was sentenced on all charges on November 18, 2025.
2
affirmed that he “read and wr[o]te English” and he had read and understood the
document.
Additionally, in trial cause numbers 1830949, 1867352, and 1868657,
appellant signed a Waiver of Constitutional Rights, Agreement to Stipulate, and
Judicial Confession, stating “in exchange for the [S]tate waiving its right to a jury
trial . . . I agree that I have knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily waived any
right of appeal which I may have.” Appellant also signed a Stipulation of Evidence
re: State’s Motion to Adjudicate Guilt, where he initialed the sentence stating “As
part of my agreement with the prosecutor to plead true, I AGREE TO WAIVE any
right to appeal I may have concerning any issue or claim in this case, including my
plea or true or admission of guilt.” (Emphasis omitted.)
Further, in trial cause numbers 1915655 and 1919056, the trial court’s
judgment states: “APPEAL WAIVED, NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL
GRANTED.” Moreover, in all five cases, appellant filed a letter acknowledging that
“[b]ecause the clerk’s record affirmatively shows [a]ppellant’s waiver of appeal is
valid and . . . the trial court did not give [him] permission to appeal, it would appear
that this Court has no jurisdiction over this appeal.”
Although a defendant has a statutory right to appeal his conviction, a
defendant may waive his right to appeal in all but capital cases. Carson v. State, 559
S.W.3d 489, 492–93 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). A valid waiver of appeal—one made
3
voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently—prevents a defendant from appealing
without the trial court’s consent. See id.; see also Flores v. State, Nos.
01-20-00243-CR to 01-20-00246-CR, 2020 WL 2988564, at *1 (Tex. App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] June 4, 2020, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for
publication). “[A] defendant may knowingly and intelligently waive his appeal as
part of a plea when consideration is given by the State, even when sentencing is not
agreed upon.” Carson, 559 S.W.3d at 494; see Jones v. State, 488 S.W.3d 801, 804–
08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (explaining presentence waivers of right of appeal have
been upheld when record showed defendant received consideration for waiver).
The record for all cases shows appellant waived his right of appeal, and in
filings to this Court, he has admitted that he waived his right of appeal. Accordingly,
we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). We
dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Gunn, Caughey, and Morgan.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4