The Texas Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal by Natividad Longoria Jr. due to a lack of jurisdiction. Longoria, who was convicted in three separate cases, attempted to challenge his convictions but was found to have waived his right to appeal. This ruling affects Longoria and may set a precedent for similar cases where defendants waive their appeal rights.

This case, docket number 13-26-00380-CR, is part of a series of appeals filed by Longoria on May 8, 2026. The court's decision highlights the importance of understanding the implications of plea bargains, especially regarding the right to appeal. The dismissal underscores the significance of adhering to procedural rules in the Texas judicial system.

Background

Natividad Longoria Jr. was involved in three criminal cases in the 343rd District Court of San Patricio County, Texas. The nature of the charges and the details of the convictions were not specified in the court opinion. However, it is clear that Longoria entered into plea bargains in each case, which typically involve defendants pleading guilty in exchange for reduced sentences or other concessions.

The appeals arose when Longoria sought to challenge his convictions. The Texas Court of Appeals reviewed the cases after Longoria’s attorney filed notices of appeal. However, the court found that the trial court had certified that Longoria had waived his right to appeal as part of his plea agreements.

The Ruling

The Texas Court of Appeals ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to hear Longoria's appeals. Chief Justice Jaime Tijerina, along with Justices Cron and Fonseca, stated, "the trial court has certified that these are plea bargain cases, appellant ‘has NO right of appeal,’ and that he ‘waived the right of appeal.’" This ruling was based on the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, which dictate that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court's certification does not show that the defendant has the right to appeal.

The court emphasized that Longoria's counsel confirmed that he did not retain the right to appeal in any of the three cases. As a result, the court dismissed the appeals due to a lack of jurisdiction, stating, "Accordingly, these cases are each dismissed for want of jurisdiction." This decision reinforces the legal principle that defendants must be aware of their rights when entering plea agreements.

Impact

The dismissal of Longoria's appeals has significant implications for defendants in Texas who enter plea bargains. It serves as a reminder that waiving the right to appeal is a serious decision that can limit legal recourse after a conviction. This case may influence how future defendants approach plea agreements and their understanding of the rights they are giving up.

Additionally, the ruling may affect attorneys representing clients in similar situations. Legal counsel must ensure that defendants fully understand the consequences of plea deals, including the potential loss of the right to appeal. This case could set a precedent for future appellate cases involving plea bargains and the rights of defendants.

What's Next

Longoria's case is now concluded at the appellate level, and there are no indications that it can be appealed further. Details regarding any related cases or future legal actions were not available in the court filing. As it stands, Longoria's convictions remain in effect.