Affirm and Opinion Filed May 23, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-21-00089-CR

AVELINO GREGORIO MARCOS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-0923557-Y

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Molberg, Nowell, and Goldstein

Opinion by Justice Molberg

Avelino Gregorio Marcos, appellant, appeals the revocation of his community 

supervision. Court-appointed appellate counsel, Juanita Bravo Edgecomb, filed an 

Anders brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel, asserting that there are no nonfrivolous issues that appellant could raise on appeal. We have reviewed the record 

and agree. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment below.

Appellant Avelino Marcos was indicted for the offense of burglary of a 

habitation in 2009. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and pleaded guilty 

pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement with the State. The trial court accepted the 
–2–

agreement and sentenced appellant to ten years’ confinement, probated for eight 

years. 

The State filed an amended motion to revoke appellant’s probation on May 1, 

2020. The State alleged appellant violated five conditions of supervision: that he 

failed to report to the probation office from August 2009 through February 2017

(condition (d)); failed to pay probation fees and was delinquent $1,820 (condition 

(j)); did not pay the Crime Stoppers payment and was delinquent $50 (condition (k)); 

did not complete the required community service hours (condition (l)); and did not 

pay $6,300 in restitution as ordered (condition (p)). On January 21, 2021, the trial 

court held a hearing. Appellant pleaded not true to the allegations. After hearing 

testimony from a probation officer and appellant, the trial court found that appellant 

“did violate conditions J, K, L, and P, and [found] those allegations true.” The court 

sentenced appellant to two years’ confinement. 

If court-appointed appellate counsel files an Anders brief asserting that no 

arguable grounds for appeal exist, we must independently examine the record to 

determine whether the appeal is “wholly frivolous.” Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 

738, 744–45 (1967). “An appeal is ‘wholly frivolous’ or ‘without merit’ when it 

‘lacks any basis in law or fact.’” Crowe v. State, 595 S.W.3d 317, 319 (Tex. App.—

Dallas 2020, no pet.) (quoting McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 438 n.10 

(1988)). Arguments are frivolous if they cannot conceivably persuade the court. Id. 
–3–

Counsel states in her Anders brief that she conducted a thorough review of the 

record in this case and concluded the “appeal is without merit and wholly frivolous 

in that the record reflects no reversible error.” In her motion to withdraw, counsel 

confirmed that she mailed a letter to appellant in which she notified him of his right 

to file a pro se response and his right to review the record in preparation for filing 

the response. Counsel stated she forwarded copies of the reporter’s records and the 

clerk’s record to appellant. 

This Court also sent appellant a letter informing him that counsel filed an 

Anders brief and a motion to withdraw. Copies of the brief and motion were 

included with the letter. This Court informed appellant that he had a right to review 

the appellate record himself, to file a pro se response, and to seek discretionary 

review should the Court find his appeal frivolous. Appellant did not file a response.

Based on our review of the record, we conclude that appellant’s appeal “lacks 

any basis in law or fact” and is therefore frivolous. See Crowe, 595 S.W.3d at 319. 

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the trial court’s 

judgment.

210089f.u05

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47

/Ken Molberg/

KEN MOLBERG

JUSTICE
–4–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

AVELINO GREGORIO MARCOS, 

Appellant

No. 05-21-00089-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District 

Court No. 7, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-0923557-Y.

Opinion delivered by Justice 

Molberg. Justices Nowell and 

Goldstein participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 23rd day of May, 2022.