You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]



NO. 07-02-0243-CR
					NO. 07-02-0244-CR
 
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

SEPTEMBER 24, 2003

______________________________

JESUS ALBERTO HERNANDEZ, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE


_________________________________

FROM THE 121ST DISTRICT COURT OF TERRY COUNTY;

NO. 4778, 4779; HONORABLE KELLY G. MOORE, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
	Appellant Jesus Alberto Hernandez appeals from his convictions for aggravated
robbery and escape and from his sentences of 30 years and 10 years incarceration,
respectively.  We affirm.
	On April 8, 2002, appellant pled guilty to charges of aggravated robbery and
escape.  The judge of the 121st District Court of Terry County found that the evidence
substantiated appellant's guilt, accepted appellant's guilty pleas and found appellant guilty. 
A consolidated sentencing hearing was held on April 29, 2002.  Both the State and
appellant presented evidence at the sentencing hearing.  At the conclusion of the hearing,
the trial judge sentenced appellant to serve 30 years imprisonment for the aggravated
robbery conviction, and 10 years imprisonment for the escape conviction.
	Appellant filed a motion for new trial on May 22, 2002.  On May 24, 2002, appellant
filed general notices of appeal.    
	Counsel for appellant has filed a Motion to Withdraw and a Brief in Support thereof. 
In support of the motion to withdraw, counsel has certified that, in compliance with Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the record has
been diligently reviewed and that in the opinion of counsel, the record reflects no
reversible error or grounds upon which a non-frivolous appeal can arguably be predicated. 
Counsel thus concludes that the appeal is frivolous.  Counsel has discussed why, under
the controlling authorities, there is no reversible error in the trial court proceedings or 
judgment.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978).   
	In reaching the conclusion that the appeal is frivolous, counsel advances two
possible issues.   In the first possible issue advanced by counsel, counsel argues that the
trial court potentially erred by admitting appellant's written statement as evidence against
him during the punishment hearing.  Counsel argues that it is unclear that the procedural
requirements of Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Ann. art. 38.22(2)(a) (Vernon 1979) (1) were
sufficiently complied with so as to render appellant's statement admissible as evidence. 
Specifically, counsel argues that it is unclear whether the person to whom appellant gave
his written statement was present when appellant was given the warnings required by art.
38.22.  In the second possible issue advanced by counsel, counsel identifies several
instances during the punishment hearing where the trial court allowed evidence pertaining
to appellant's juvenile record over appellant's objection.  
	After referencing, analyzing and discussing both the record, counsel has discussed
why, under the controlling authorities, there is no arguably reversible error in the trial
court's judgment.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978).  In
concluding that the appeal is without merit, counsel notes that in regard to appellant's
written statement, the evidence contained in the statement was largely duplicative of other
evidence that was properly before the court.  In addition, counsel notes that parts of
appellant's statement could have been properly admitted to impeach appellant's testimony
during the hearing which was inconsistent with appellant's version of events as detailed
in the written statement.  Tex. R. Evid. 613.  Therefore, counsel concludes that it is unclear
how admission of the statement could have affected appellant's substantial rights.
	Counsel notes that the written statement reflects that it was made to the same
officer who administered the warning required by art. 38.22.  Therefore, the statement
facially complies with art. 38.22's requirements.  According to that officer's testimony, he
was in and out of the room while appellant gave his statement.  Counsel directs our
attention to evidence that another officer was in the same room when appellant was giving
his statement.  See, e.g., Dowthitt v. State, 931 S.W.2d 244, 258 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996)
(holding that the requirements of art. 38.22 are satisfied if the person who takes the
statement is present when another person administers the statutory warnings).  That
officer had previously been released from his subpoena with appellant's consent and was
no longer available to testify.  We also note that the witness to whom the statement was
nominally given testified that appellant signed the statement.  We further note that there
was no objection to the effect that appellant's statement was not voluntarily made or that
the statutory warnings were not administered.  See, e.g., Hulen v. State, 145 Tex.Crim.
344, 346-47, 167 S.W.2d 752, 753 (1942). 
	Regarding the second possible issue advanced by counsel, the Legislature has
provided that evidence of juvenile adjudications are admissible during the punishment
phase of trial.  See Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Ann. § 37.07(3)(a) (Vernon Supp. 2003).
	Counsel has attached exhibits showing that a copy of the Anders brief and Motion
to Withdraw have been forwarded to appellant, and that counsel has appropriately advised
appellant of appellant's right to review the record and file a response to counsel's motion
and brief.  Appellant has not filed a response to counsel's motion and brief.
	We have made an independent examination of the record to determine whether
there are any other arguable grounds for the appeals.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,
109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed. 2d 300 (1988); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511
(Tex.Crim.App. 1991).  We have found no such grounds.  We agree that the appeals are
frivolous. 
	Accordingly, counsel's Motion to Withdraw is granted.  The judgment of the trial
court is affirmed.
 
							Phil Johnson
							Chief Justice
 

Do not publish.
1. Further reference to Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Ann. art. 38.22 shall be by reference
to "art. 38.22."