Live courthouse data across 10 states. Pro users get alerted instantly on every filing. Get started

William Antoine Thomas v. the State of Texas

Docket 10-26-00130-CR

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

Criminal AppealDismissed
Filed
Jurisdiction
Texas
Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)
Type
Lead Opinion
Disposition
Dismissed
Docket
10-26-00130-CR

Appeal from a conviction pursuant to a plea bargain in a criminal case in the 361st District Court of Brazos County, Texas.

Summary

The Court of Appeals dismissed William Antoine Thomas’s appeal from a conviction entered pursuant to a plea bargain because the trial-court certification, signed by the judge, Thomas, and his trial counsel, states the case is a plea-bargain case, that the defendant has no right of appeal, and that Thomas waived his right to appeal. The State moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, and the court granted the motion, holding the certification deprived it of jurisdiction to hear the appeal under applicable Texas appellate rules and precedent.

Issues Decided

  • Whether the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to hear an appeal when the trial-court certification states the defendant in a plea-bargain case has no right of appeal and has waived that right.
  • Whether the State’s motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction should be granted given the trial-court certification and controlling appellate rule and precedent.

Court's Reasoning

The court relied on the trial-court certification, signed by the judge, defendant, and defense counsel, which expressly stated the defendant had no right of appeal because the conviction resulted from a plea bargain and that the right was waived. Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) and binding precedent, an appeal must be dismissed if the record does not contain a certification showing the defendant has a right of appeal. Because the certification here showed no right to appeal, the court lacked jurisdiction and dismissal was required.

Authorities Cited

  • Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d)
  • Monreal v. State99 S.W.3d 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003)

Parties

Appellant
William Antoine Thomas
Appellee
The State of Texas
Judge
David G. Hilburn
Judge
Chief Justice Matt Johnson

Key Dates

trial-court certification date
2026-04-09
opinion filed
2026-04-16

What You Should Do Next

  1. 1

    Consult criminal defense counsel

    Discuss whether there are any available post-conviction remedies (for example, a motion for new trial if timely, habeas corpus petition, or a request to the trial court to correct the certification).

  2. 2

    Review trial-court certification

    If there is a basis to contest the accuracy or validity of the certification (for example, lack of a knowing waiver), gather records and evidence to present to counsel or a court.

  3. 3

    Consider filing a habeas petition

    If counsel identifies constitutional or jurisdictional defects not subject to the waiver, a state or federal habeas petition may be evaluated as a potential next step.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?
The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal because the trial-court certification shows the defendant waived any right to appeal in a plea-bargain case, leaving the appellate court without jurisdiction.
Who is affected by this decision?
The decision affects William Antoine Thomas, whose appeal is dismissed, and it reinforces that defendants who waive appeal rights in plea agreements cannot appeal absent a valid certification showing a right to appeal.
What happens next for the defendant?
Because the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, the trial-court conviction and sentence entered pursuant to the plea bargain remain in effect unless the defendant pursues another available post-conviction remedy.
Can this dismissal be appealed further?
The appellate court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on the certification; options for further appeal are limited and would depend on whether any higher court will consider a petition challenging the dismissal or the underlying certification.

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
Court of Appeals
                   Tenth Appellate District of Texas

                               10-26-00130-CR


                          William Antoine Thomas,
                                 Appellant

                                        v.

                              The State of Texas,
                                   Appellee



                            On appeal from the
               361st District Court of Brazos County, Texas
                    Judge David G. Hilburn, presiding
                Trial Court Cause No. 25-00242-CRF-361

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

                       MEMORANDUM OPINION

      William Antoine Thomas appealed from a judgment of conviction

pursuant to a plea bargain. The certificate of right of appeal signed by the trial

court, Thomas, and Thomas’s trial counsel dated April 9, 2026, indicates that

this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal,” and

that “[t]he defendant has waived the right of appeal for all purposes.” The

State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
       Because the trial court’s certificate of right of appeal signed by Thomas

indicates that this is a plea-bargain case and there is no right to appeal and

that Thomas has waived the right to appeal, this appeal must be

dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); ("The appeal must be dismissed if a

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been

made a part of the record under these rules."); Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615,

622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).

       Accordingly, the State’s motion to dismiss is granted and this appeal

is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.




                                            MATT JOHNSON
                                            Chief Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: April 16, 2026
Before Chief Justice Johnson,
       Justice Smith, and
       Justice Harris
Appeal dismissed;
Motion granted
Do not publish
CR25




Thomas v. State                                                         Page 2