El Keithtryck Robert Mason, Jr. v. the State of Texas
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)
Date FiledOctober 8, 2026
Docket11-26-00227-CR
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Opinion filed October 8, 2026
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
___________
Nos. 11-26-00225-CR, 11-26-00226-CR, & 11-26-00227-CR
___________
EL KEITHTRYCK ROBERT MASON, JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 350th District Court
Taylor County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 16184-D, 15595-D, & 15604-D
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, El Keithtryck Robert Mason, Jr., pleaded guilty to three felony
offenses: the first-degree felony offense of aggravated kidnapping; the second-
degree felony offense of aggravated assault; and the state jail felony offense of
publishing or threatening to publish intimate material. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN.
§§ 20.04(c), 21.16(g), 22.02(b) (West 2026). Pursuant to a negotiated plea bargain
agreement between Appellant and the State, the trial court sentenced Appellant to
imprisonment in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice (TDCJ) for thirty-five years for the offense of aggravated kidnapping and for
seven years for the offense of aggravated assault. In addition, the trial court,
pursuant to the parties’ agreement, sentenced Appellant to confinement in the State
Jail Division of TDCJ for two years for the offense of publishing or threatening to
publish intimate material. The trial court ordered that Appellant’s sentences be
served concurrently and signed a judgment in each case. Appellant later filed a pro
se notice of appeal from each judgment. We dismiss the appeals.
When the appeals were docketed, we notified Appellant that the trial court
had certified, in each case, that (1) the case was a plea bargain case in which
Appellant had no right of appeal, and (2) Appellant waived his right of appeal. See
TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2018); TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). In
our letters, we requested a response showing grounds to continue the appeals and
informed Appellant that the appeals were subject to dismissal.
Appellant’s counsel filed a response in our cause nos. 11-26-00226-CR and
11-26-00227-CR, confirming that Appellant does not have a right to appeal and that
“he clearly waived any right to appeal.” He further states that Appellant
“affirmatively waived any rights to appeal on the record and signed plea papers on
all three cases,” and he describes the terms of the plea bargain agreement, which are
consistent with the trial court’s sentences in each case. Appellant filed a response
in our cause no. 11-26-00225-CR but does not show grounds to continue the appeal.
Rule 25.2(a)(2) provides that, in a plea bargain case in which the punishment
imposed does not exceed the punishment agreed to by the parties, “a defendant may
appeal only: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on
before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal, or (C) where the
specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2); see
also CRIM. PROC. art. 44.02. Subsections (A), (B), and (C) are not applicable here.
Further, Rule 25.2 does not permit a plea-bargaining defendant to appeal matters
related to the voluntariness of his plea unless the defendant has obtained the trial
2
court’s permission to appeal. See Ex parte Castillo, 664 S.W.3d 833, 834 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2022); Harper v. State, 567 S.W.3d 450, 455–56 (Tex. App.—Fort
Worth 2019, no pet.) (collecting cases).
As noted above, in each case, the trial court certified that the case was a plea
bargain case, that Appellant had no right of appeal, and that Appellant waived his
right of appeal. The trial court’s certifications were signed by Appellant, Appellant’s
counsel, and the presiding judge. The documents on file in this court support the
trial court’s certifications. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613–14 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2005). Accordingly, we must dismiss these appeals without further action.
TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App.
2006).
These appeals are dismissed.
W. STACY TROTTER
JUSTICE
October 8, 2026
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.
3