Omarion Brown v. the State of Texas
Docket 01-25-01064-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
- 01-25-01064-CR
Appeal from judgments in five felony convictions where the defendant had entered plea agreements and the trial court entered judgments.
Summary
The First District of Texas dismissed Omarion Brown’s appeals in five criminal cases because the trial-court record shows he validly waived his right to appeal as part of plea agreements. Brown pleaded guilty or stipulated to evidence in five felony cases, signed written waivers and advisals acknowledging he gave up his appeal rights, and the judgments expressly state appeal was waived. Because a valid, knowing, and voluntary waiver bars appeal absent trial-court permission, the appellate court concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeals and any pending motions.
Issues Decided
- Whether the defendant validly waived his right to appeal by signing written waivers and plea-related documents.
- Whether the appellate court has jurisdiction to hear appeals when the record shows the defendant waived the right to appeal without trial-court permission.
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on the rule that a defendant may waive the right to appeal if the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and made with consideration. The written record—signed advisals, waivers, stipulations, and judgments stating "appeal waived"—demonstrated Brown knowingly and voluntarily gave up his appeal rights. Because the certifications and record show no right of appeal and no trial-court permission was granted, the appellate court lacked jurisdiction and therefore dismissed the appeals.
Authorities Cited
- Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), 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
- Per Curiam (Justices Gunn, Caughey, and Morgan)
Key Dates
- Opinion issued
- 2026-04-16
- Sentencing date for all charges
- 2025-11-18
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Consult criminal defense counsel
Speak with an attorney about whether the appeal waivers were truly knowing and voluntary or whether any procedural defects exist that could justify relief.
- 2
Request trial-court permission to appeal
If counsel believes there are grounds, petition the trial court for permission to appeal, which could restore appellate jurisdiction in these cases.
- 3
Consider collateral remedies
If appeal is unavailable, evaluate post-conviction options such as a habeas corpus application or motion for new trial if supported by new evidence or constitutional claims.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The court dismissed Brown’s appeals because he had validly waived his right to appeal in the trial-court record, so the appellate court had no jurisdiction.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- The decision affects Omarion Brown and the State in these five criminal cases; it prevents Brown from pursuing these appeals absent trial-court permission.
- What happens next?
- The dismissals end these appeals; Brown may seek the trial court’s permission to appeal or pursue other post-conviction remedies if available.
- On what grounds were the appeals dismissed?
- They were dismissed because the written plea documents, advisals, and judgments in the record show Brown knowingly and voluntarily waived his appeal rights.
- Can this decision be appealed?
- Because the appellate court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on a valid waiver, Brown cannot appeal these dismissals unless the trial court later grants permission to appeal or a collateral proceeding succeeds.
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