right to appeal, these are the dates listed on the documents. Both documents were filed with the clerk of the court on March 12, 2004. 2 . Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 42.12, § 5(b) states in part that "[a]fter an adjudication of guilt, all proceedings, including assessment of punishment, pronouncement of sentence, granting of community supervision, and defendant’s appeal continue as if the adjudication of guilt had not been deferred.” 3 . It is interesting to note that the courts of appeals have continued to hold that presen-tencing waivers do not prevent appeals from the punishment phase of trial when a defendant’s punishment is not certain by relying on Townsend and Thomas instead of Blanco. Tufele v. State, 130 S.W.3d 267, 270 (Tex.App.-Houston [14 Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Perez v. State, 129 S.W.3d 282, 287-88
holding that the hearsay rule is not suspended in the sentencing phase holding statute does not prohibit victim from making a specific sentencing recommendation holding circuit courts decision to depart from the presumptive sentencing recommendation and impose a prison sentence was reversible error where defendant objected on the basis that the state failed to give notice of aggravating factors that would justify a dispositional departure from the presumptive sentencing recommendation and the trial court failed to state on the record a reason for its departure holding that failure to object to magistrate judges recommendation waived issue on appeal holding that presentencing waiver did not prevent appeals from the punishment phase of trial because without a sentencing recommendation the waivers consequences could not be known and the appellant neither bargained for a sentencing recommendation nor waived his right to appeal after sentencing