# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

N o. 04

- 18

- 00097

- CR

Ruben Gian Antonio LOPEZ , Appellant

v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CR5998W Honorable Joey Contreras, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Ju stice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 21, 2018
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

Ruben Gian Antonio Lopez pled no contest to a third degree felony offense of assault on a family member in exchange for the State’s recommendation that adjudication be deferred. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the trial court deferred adjudication and placed Lopez on community supervision for a period of five years. The trial court subsequently modified the terms of Lopez’s community supervision after Lopez pled true to allegations in the State’s first motion to revoke. In September 2017, the State filed a second mo tion to revoke community supervision a nd adjudicate guilt, alleging L o pez violated numerous conditions of his community supervision.04

- 18

- 00097

- CR

- 2

- Lopez pled true to the allegation that he failed to report to his Supervision Officer as required. The trial court adjudica ted Lopez guilty and sentenced h im to five years in prison and a fine of $1,500.
Lopez’s court

- appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief demonstrates a pr ofessional and thorough evaluation of the record and meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978), and Gainous v.

State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel sent copies of the brief , motion to

withdraw , and the appellate record to Lopez and informed Lopez of his rights in compliance with the requirements of Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313 (2014). Both counsel and t his court advised Lopez of his right to file a pro se brief, but no pro se brief has been filed. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and counsel’s brief

. We conclude the record presents no arguable grounds for appellate review and the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

- 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Lopez ’s counsel and affirm the trial court’s judgment. See id .; Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State , 9 24 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1996, no pet.). 1
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH

1 No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Lopez wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must b e filed within thirty days after either this opinion is rendered or the last timely motion for rehearing or motion for en banc reconsideration is overruled by this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with th e clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.